Abstract
Contentment is an emotion felt when the present situation is perceived to be complete as it is. Six studies are presented showing the difference between contentment and other positive emotions, documenting contentment’s unique relationship with self-acceptance, and exploring the positive associations between contentment and wellbeing. First, we demonstrated that contentment is perceived as different from happiness and other positive emotions using an emotion concept mapping methodology (Study 1), a dimensional analysis (Study 2), and a free-response narrative analysis (Study 3). We then demonstrated that both trait (Study 4 and 5) and state levels (Study 6) of contentment are associated with a sense of self-acceptance, and further related to increased wellbeing. We conclude that contentment is a unique positive emotion that is central to wellbeing and life satisfaction, and we discuss important implications for future research.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Siddhartha Gautama, also known as Gautama Buddha, is famously known to have said, “Health is the greatest gift; contentment is the greatest wealth” (Carter, 2000). Contentment, or the experience of completeness, has been central to philosophical discourse for over 4,000 years. Both anecdotal evidence and lay theories suggest that this low arousal, positive emotion is the ideal human emotional experience, and it is cornerstone to psychological wellbeing. While contentment has been a subject of rich philosophical, spiritual, and scientific discussion for millennia, research into the nature of this emotion has long been neglected in the social psychology literature. The six studies reported herein provide an empirically-derived description of contentment, as well as clarify the relationship of contentment with various social and cognitive constructs (i.e., unconditional self-acceptance, well-being). More specifically, we test two questions: first, how does contentment distinguish itself from happiness and other more well-studied positive emotions (e.g., awe, compassion, pride, etc.)? Second, why and how are experiences of contentment associated with uplifted well-being?
1 Contentment: A Discrete Positive Emotion
Contentment is an emotion that arises when a person holistically perceives the present situation as whole and enough (Cordaro et al., 2016a). The felt experience of contentment is not a situational perception itself specific to any given event, but relies on an integrative perception of one’s general life conditions to be sufficient and complete. For instance, the physical body may feel safe, relaxed, and at ease when biological needs are perceived to be met (Jackson, 2002), and the psyche may experience the mental state of psychological wholeness (Gaskins, 1999) or a state of acceptance of everything that is, including a broad array of desirable and undesirable circumstances (Venkatsananda, 2010). Overall, the central theme of contentment experiences shares one core theme: a sense of completeness. According to the broaden-and-build theory, contentment, together with other positive emotions (e.g., love, joy, and interest), broaden thought-action tendencies and facilitate the building of physical, intellectual, social, and psychological resources (Fredrickson, 1998, 2001). However, compared to other positive emotions, contentment uniquely covaries with temporary states of parasympathetic activation (Frijda, 1986), and the psychological experience of savoring current life circumstances (Izard, 1977), which promotes the integration of self-insights and the altering of world views (Fredrickson, 2004).
There is a rich history in social psychological research for establishing the discreteness of specific emotions. Discrete emotion theory distinguishes emotions from one another along physiological, neurological, functional, and behavioral dimensions (Harmon-Jones et al., 2017). Emotions are represented by thousands of semantic terms providing us with a rich lexicon of symbolic language to communicate our internal states (Russell, 1991). Dozens of studies have attempted to analyze the cluster analytic structure of these emotions as they pertain to sundry affective dimensions, such as valence, arousal, control, acquisition, etc. (Russell, 2003). Another line of research has sought to analyze emotions as groups of semantic spaces or emotion ‘families’ (Ekman & Cordaro, 2011; Keltner et al., 2010). While these studies have provided robust evidence for a limited set of well-researched emotions, others, such as contentment, have only recently been featured in factor analytic analyses, though these studies largely treated contentment within the larger context of dozens of other emotions and emotion categories (Cordaro et al., 2016a, 2016b; Cowen & Keltner, 2017). To date, no study has mapped the emotion concept space using category-free classification systems (e.g., similarity) and focused on distinguishing contentment from related states (for a review see Cordaro, 2021).
While contentment has yet to be solidly established as a unique and discrete emotion (Cordaro, 2021), multiple studies have demonstrated evidence that this emotion can be reliably distinguished from other emotions based on its associated physiological experience, facial expression, vocal expression, body posture, and behavioral outcomes. For example, in one study, researchers showed participants two film clips and asked them to report their emotional reactions (Gross & Levenson, 1995). They found that 87% of participants reported contentment as the most prominent emotion after watching the contentment-eliciting relaxing beach scenes. Using similar emotion film methods, studies have begun to demonstrate the distinct physiological markers associated with contentment, such as decreased heart rate, blood pressure, and left ventricular contractility, all of which indicate the deactivation of the sympathetic nervous system and were absent in the experience of happiness and joy (Kreibig, 2010). Contentment expressions have also been found to be reliably signaled across cultures through facial expression (Keltner & Cordaro, 2015), nonverbal vocal expression (Cordaro et al., 2016b), and bodily expressions through dance and movement among other positive, negative, and neutral emotions (Hejmadi et al., 2000). Taken together, this collection of studies provided the initial evidence for contentment as a unique emotion, however, additional studies are required to understand how it differs from similar states, and how it relates to human wellbeing.
While people may respond to what is broadly good and meaningful in life with happiness and other positive states, contentment is a unique emotion beyond a mere proxy of happiness. Different from some positive emotions that are directed towards others and external stimulus (e.g., amusement and gratitude), contentment uniquely involves the appraisal of the situation having relevance and agency of the self (Tong, 2015a). Within the family of low-activation positive states, contentment can also be distinguished from similar states such as relief, peace, and tranquility (Cordaro et al., 2016a). The semantic/lexical approach to emotions (Clore & Ortony, 1988) suggests that even though different emotion words may be used to refer to an emotional experience of the same nature, some words refer to emotion-like states but not necessarily an emotion. For example, calmness represents a low-arousal state that is the opposite to excitation, which may enable the generation of contentment feelings (Picard et al., 2001). Some emotions are defined in ways contingent on the present, past, or future conditions of the situation: Peace is experienced in the present situation where there is harmony, security, and a lack of disturbance (De Rivera & Páez, 2007). Serenity entails inner peace and the absence of intense emotions (Connors et al., 1999). Tranquility involves the appraisal of the current or future situation to be free from obstacles and certain (Ellsworth & Smith, 1988). The adjectives, “peaceful”, “serene”, and “tranquil” can all be used to describe the external situation, but not always inner states. Relief often follows an unpleasant episode in the past or the perceived absence of outcomes more negative in comparison to the present moment (Graham et al., 2022). Hope entails positive expectations about desirable future circumstances (Lazarus, 1999). All these states rely on external conditions and can be distinguished from contentment, which does not rely on the actual or expected circumstances.
In the present investigation, we aim to identify the unique dimensional and cluster-analytic properties of contentment. Additionally, we explore how other positive emotions (e.g., happiness, relief, pride) differentiate from one another and from contentment. By using a dimensional approach, we explore contentment’s relative position in the vast affective space of human emotion experience (Russell, 1980). Among various types of dimensions that have been used to characterize emotions, many researchers agree that valence (degree of pleasantness) and arousal (physiological activation) are two core qualities of individual emotional experiences (Russell, 1980). Along these dimensions, researchers have sought to represent emotions and their relationships using sundry models and forms, including a circumplex array (Posner et al., 2005), a quadrant-grid (Lindquist & Barrett, 2008), and an 8-limbed starburst (Plutchik & Conte, 1997).
Beyond valence and arousal, we are also interested in exploring how contentment differentiates from other emotions based on the core appraisal associated with contentment: a sense of completeness in the present moment. Additionally, we explore two additional well-studied characteristics of emotion related to the sense of completeness: acquisition-orientation (Bonanno & Keltner, 2004) and temporal orientation (Aspinwall, 2005). High acquisition-orientation correlates with the tendency to accumulate desired objects. In other words, it is feeling the need to acquire things that are believed to be lacking. We posited that this dimension would be one of the primary distinguishing characteristics of contentment as it compares to other positive states, due to the association between contentment and a sense of completeness or enoughness (Sinnott & Berlanstein, 2006). Secondly, temporal orientation refers to the time perspective associated with an emotional experience. Time perspectives range from past-oriented, present-focused, or future-oriented. Previous studies have demonstrated that contentment may be uniquely associated with present-moment acceptance (Hayes et al., 2006) and present-moment focus (Cordaro et al., 2016a), and so we tested the extent to which temporal orientation would distinguish contentment from other positive states.
2 Contentment May Improve Wellbeing Through Self-Acceptance
The second major question guiding the present investigation is: What is the association between contentment and wellbeing? Well-being has been traditionally conceptualized as both having a hedonic component (i.e., experiencing pleasant emotions) and eudaimonic component (i.e., committing to goal-directed behaviors that increase meaning in life and fulfil psychological needs) (Deci & Ryan, 2008; Fromm, 1981). Research has consistently demonstrated the benefits of experiencing low-arousal positive emotions in general. Low-arousal positive emotions (e.g., calmness and contentment) uniquely contributed to not only higher life satisfaction, but also lower depression and anxiety above and beyond high-arousal positive emotions (e.g., excitement, enthusiasm; McManus et al., 2019). In a randomized controlled study, low-arousal positive states also explained the effects of positive psychology interventions on a composite of motional, social and psychological well-being (Kraiss et al., 2023). However, limited studies have examined well-being indicators associated with contentment as a discrete positive emotion.
Central to contentment is the feeling of completeness (Cordaro et al., 2016a). Completeness has been described as an acceptance of the self and the story we have woven about our lives (Sinnott & Berlanstein, 2006). Guided by this theorizing, contentment, the extent to which we cultivate these feelings of completeness, would be linked with a greater sense of psychological and subjective wellbeing (Ryff & Keyes, 1995).
Despite the dearth of evidence linking contentment to greater wellbeing, several lines of research set the stage for our hypotheses. First, as noted by several theorists, dictionary definitions refer to contentment as involving a sense of completeness, and the word contentment has roots in Latin continere (v.), meaning, “to hold together” or “that which is contained,” which later evolved into the word contentus to describe a person who felt whole, fully contained, or complete, desiring nothing more than their present experience (Weekley, 2012). The ability to be contented with the self and its surroundings, as well as to take life as it comes and master it, constitutes components of positive mental well-being (Jahoda, 1958; Taylor & Brown, 1988). Thus, beyond the hedonic benefits of experiencing contentment as a positive emotional state (i.e., feeling ‘good’), experiencing contentment should also be linked with improved eudaimonic aspects of well-being that include a sense of purpose/meaning in life and positive relations with self and others (Barrett-Cheetham et al., 2016; Ryff & Keyes, 1995).
Second, in the disciplines of religious studies and philosophy where contentment has been a focal topic of inquiry for centuries, several theorists have proposed that contentment is the path to true and lasting happiness (for a review, see Cordaro, 2021). In the Early Common Era and Middle Ages, religious scholars conceptualized contentment as a state arises from appraisals of peace, completeness, and equanimity, and acts as a path to supreme wellbeing (Patanjali, 1990). Later classical philosophical accounts such as Zen Buddhism further recognized the close relationship between contentment and wellbeing. Zen Buddhists claim that humans’ suffering lies in their deep discontentment with the endless seeking of permanence, maximized pleasure, and egoistic acquisitions (Gaskins, 1999). The journey of cultivating contentment terminates the anxiety underlying such strivings. One fully awakens to life’s possibilities and wholeness, achieving ‘Satori’, sudden spiritual enlightenment (Suzuki, 1961). Contemporary philosophers have argued that because humans are commonly discontented with the mismatch between their insatiable materialistic desires and the suboptimal societal supplies, the experience of contentment can be viewed as a kind of barometer for the extent to which we are producing social, psychological, and environmental structures that sustain global wellness (Jackson, 2002).
Most germane to our investigation, contentment has been found to be closely associated with a strong endorsement of self-acceptance—the tendency to accept the self without judgment, regardless of the appropriateness or righteousness of one’s behavior and its outcomes (Ellis, 1994). The term “unconditional” in the construct term of “unconditional self-acceptance” emphasizes deriving a stable sense of self-worth independent from the changing circumstances of successes or failures, and positive or negative social feedback. In other words, positive or negative self-evaluations may be present, but the sense of self is resilient to changes in feedback external to the sense of self, such as social norms, respect, and approval. Because the contentment experience promotes sitting back and perceiving the current experience as just “enough”, it should promote such acceptance of the self. People often protect their self-esteem when receiving negative social evaluations or social disapproval (Crocker et al., 1987). The feeling that one’s self-worth is contingent on external circumstances can create a fragile sense of self that becomes vulnerable to depression and other deleterious outcomes (Kernis, 2005). Self-acceptance is not redundant with the concept of self-esteem, since accepting all facets of the self involves a lack of tendencies to inflate the self’s worth or over-criticize the self (Popov, 2019). This tendency in fact may promote rational beliefs about the possibility of improving the self (Davies, 2008).
The disposition to accept oneself has been found associated with indicators of higher well-being and less ill-being, including reduced anxiety and depression (Chamberlain & Haaga, 2001), less maladaptive perfectionism (Scott, 2007), and higher self-compassion and satisfaction of psychological needs (Faustino et al., 2020). Given that contentment involves feelings of completeness and full acceptance of the self (Cordaro et al., 2016a), and on the literature linking self-acceptance to multiple aspects of wellbeing (Chamberlain & Haaga, 2001), it is hypothesized that self-acceptance may help explain the link between contentment to higher wellbeing.
3 The Present Investigation
In the current investigation, we tested our hypotheses across six studies using varying methodologies that examine the uniqueness of contentment as a discrete low-arousal positive emotion, and its relationship with wellbeing. Our first hypothesis (Hypothesis 1) was that contentment is distinct from other similar emotions across multiple dimensions. We examined how contentment may be perceived as different from happiness and other emotions using an emotion concept mapping methodology (Study 1), a dimensional analysis (Study 2), and a free-response narrative analysis (Study 3). Guided by theoretical analyses on links between contentment, self-acceptance, and wellbeing (Cordaro et al., 2016a), we predicted that contentment will be associated with a sense of self-acceptance and increased wellbeing (Hypothesis 2). We tested this hypothesis through a set of two studies exploring whether trait (Study 4 & 5) and state levels (Study 6) of contentment support this relationship. We predicted that dispositional contentment would uniquely predict psychological wellbeing, satisfaction with life, and self-acceptance above and beyond other dispositional positive emotions and tested this prediction using an emotion-rating method (Study 4 & 5). In our final study, we sought to experimentally test our second hypothesis by inducing various affective states to ascertain whether state contentment predicts wellbeing through states of self-acceptance (Study 6). Our bottom-up semantic approach of studying people’s perceptions about emotions and related emotional dimensions (i.e., similarities and differences, valence and arousal, etc.; Study 1–3) should complement the survey and experimental methods used (Study 4–6) in studying people’s emotional experiences that are more episodic and contextualized (Robinson & Clore, 2002). We believe together, these studies would provide a robust investigation of contentment as a discrete positive emotion that is uniquely linked with higher well-being.
4 Study 1
In Study 1, we used a cluster analysis to test the familywise relationships between 29 different emotions. Guided by previous theoretical analyses of contentment as a unique low-arousal positive emotion (Fredrickson, 2001), we hypothesized that contentment would belong to a different family of emotions than happiness, specifically, a family of emotions associated with low-arousal, pleasant experiences (e.g., peace, calm, tranquility, relief).
5 Method
5.1 Participants
Participants (N = 679) were U.S.-based users of Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk) system, who each participated in a six-minute survey and received $1.00 (rate of $10/hr) for their participation (Mage = 33.97, SDage = 16.28, 42.6% female). After excluding participants who completed fewer than 75% of the similarity ratings, the final sample size was 614. Given that our primary hypothesis test was a cluster analysis of 29 emotions, it was unclear how to identify sufficient power for our sample size for participants. However, there are suggestions about the number of items (emotions) to use for sufficiently-powered studies (Dolnicar, 2002). Moderately conservative analyses suggest a minimum of 30 types of emotions to have sufficient power to detect the theorized number of clusters, which we are just under.
5.1.1 Use of MTurk
While collecting data using MTurk has its benefits, such as sampling from diverse populations and producing results as reliable as traditional college samples (Buhrmester et al., 2011), we recognized that employing this type of acquisition modality has its limitations, which was considered when interpreting the findings. For example, issues such as generalizability and ability to extrapolate findings beyond the population of participants should be considered (Groves et al., 2011). Additionally, it is recommended that attention checks are employed to minimize issues associated data quality due to distracted or incomplete participant attention (Goodman et al., 2013). Despite these limitations, there is still merit in using these types of samples as they have been shown to produce reliable responses as compared to other more traditional subject pools (Mason & Suri, 2012). In order to improve the quality of the data we collected, we used two procedures: 1) we only recruited participants who had a 95% acceptance rate on the platform, and 2) we included at least one attention check per survey for which participants were excluded if they gave an incorrect answer. See the Supplemental Materials for a more detailed description of our considerations when using MTurk.
6 Materials and Procedure
A random item generator on Qualtrics.com assigned participants to rate 30 of the 406 possible emotion pairings, where participants were instructed to rate the similarity of different emotion pairs using an adjustable Venn diagram. Emotion comparisons have been used in other studies and theoretical descriptions of emotion (Lerner & Keltner, 2000) and were selected to equally cover the full range of emotions around the circumplex, including unpleasant emotions of both high and low arousal (Russell, 1980). Informed by the emotion literature, the 29 comparison emotions are presented and accompanied by references to experimental or theoretical treatments of each emotion (Table 1). The Institutional Review Board at Yale University approved this study.
7 Results and Brief Discussion
We conducted a cluster analysis using the K-Means Cluster procedure on all 29 emotions and 406 pair permutations (Likas et al., 2003; Macqueen, 1967). Using the mean similarity rating for each pairing, we ascertained which emotions were most related according to the participants, and how they might be categorized. This procedure has been used in prior studies to compute clustering based on similarity of qualitative variables (e.g., Bigné & Andreu, 2004; Dhall et al., 2011). This type of agglomerative clustering is appropriate for studies where the number of clusters is theoretically hypothesized (Macqueen, 1967). Based on the circumplex model of emotions (Russell, 1980), which categorizes emotions along two dimensions (arousal and valence), we predicted a four-cluster valence and arousal system. Table 2 presents the mean similarity ratings across all emotion pairs, and Fig. 1 illustrates the same data using Gephi, a program that produces 3-dimensional visual spaces for comparing relative Euclidean distances between nodes. In the figure, the colors represent emotion families derived from the cluster analysis, and the line lengths indicate the relative similarities between concepts (shorter and thicker is more similar).
When applying the cluster analysis described above, the positive emotions clustered in accordance with our hypotheses. There was one ‘high arousal positive’ cluster (yellow) containing all seven emotions hypothesized to fit into this group, with the addition of surprise (see Table 2). There was also a ‘low arousal positive’ cluster (green), which contained all of the emotions hypothesized to belong to this group, with the exception of sympathy (i.e., still clustered with the low-arousal emotions but not considered similar enough to the emotions of positive valence; See Fig. 1). Supporting our main hypothesis, the cluster analysis revealed that happiness and contentment belonged to separate affect categories.
The negative emotions, in contrast, did not follow a clean division by arousal, though this finding was less germane to the hypothesis. These final two clusters comprised of a large ‘negative emotion’ group (red) that contained shame, despair, disappointment, anxiety, confusion, contempt, embarrassment, pain, anger, fear, disgust, and sadness. The final cluster was the smallest (blue) and belonged to boredom and sympathy, emotions that were perceived as more neutral than the others, without being rated as highly similar to positive nor negative emotions.
Contentment was perceived to be significantly more similar to pleasant emotions (51.7%, M = 5.17, SD = 3.09) than to unpleasant emotions (7.1%, M = 0.71, SD = 1.58), F(1, 1104) = 958.23, p < 0.001, d = 1.833, 95% CI [−4.72, −4.20]. We found that happiness was perceived as 59.95% similar to all other positive emotions, which was the highest overall similarity rating in the positive emotion group (M = 5.95, SD = 2.61), F(13, 7498) = 49.79, p < 0.001, d = 0.51. Contentment, on the other hand, (M = 5.17, SD = 3.09) was perceived as significantly less similar (51.7%) to all other positive emotions compared to happiness, F(1, 1020) = 18.85, p < 0.001, d = 0.230, 95% CI [−1.08, −0.48]. Additionally, contentment was perceived to be 63.5% similar to low arousal pleasant emotions (M = 6.35, SD = 3.01), and 41.8% similar to high-arousal positive emotions (M = 4.18, SD = 2.80). The difference between these ratings was statistically significant F(1, 497) = 68.84, p < 0.001, d = 0.744, 95% CI [−2.48, −1.86]. It is important to note that a limitation of the cluster analysis is that we do not distinguish between clusters that are negatively related or unrelated since we are primarily interested in distinguishing between clusters. Taken together, these results provided new evidence using unidimensional similarity ratings that contentment was perceived as a positive, low-arousal emotion that is distinctly different from happiness.
8 Study 2
In Study 2, we aimed to understand the differences between contentment and related positive states. We used a dimensional approach to identify the specific differences between contentment and three well-studied positive emotions: joy, happiness, and relief (see Fredrickson, 1998; Lazarus & Lazarus, 1994). The dimensions used to ascertain differences between these states are well-established characteristics of affect, including pleasantness and activation (i.e., similar to valence and arousal described in Study 1; Posner, et al., 2005), temporal orientation (Aspinwall, 2005), and acquisition orientation (Bonanno & Keltner, 2004). Guided by previous theoretical analyses of contentment (Cordaro et al., 2016a) and prior empirical studies of contentment, we predicted that contentment would have the lowest perceived activation (Kreibig, 2010), pleasantness (Cordaro et al., 2016a), and acquisition-orientation of the four comparison emotions (Sinnott & Berlanstein, 2006), as compared with three related positive emotions of varying degrees of arousal, happiness, relief, and joy. Additionally, we predicted that contentment would be perceived as a comparatively present-oriented emotion along the temporal-orientation dimension (Kabat-Zinn, 2003).
9 Method
9.1 Participants
A total sample of 580 (Mage = 37.37, SDage = 19.35, 40.8% Female) U.S. based MTurk-workers participated in a three-minute study for $0.50 (rate of $10/hr). Based on effect sizes (average Cohen’s d = 0.51) observed in prior research assessing the dimensionality of emotions (Cordaro et al., 2015), a sample size of 72 was deemed as sufficient to achieve power of 0.95 for the one-way ANOVA analyses (G*Power; Faul, et al., 2007).
9.2 Procedure
Participants rated the four dimensions for each of the four emotions using sliding scales ranging from −5 to 5. All participants submitted ratings for contentment, happiness, relief, and joy.
10 Results and Brief Discussion
Significant differences in perceived activation levels were found among the four emotions (contentment, happiness, relief, and joy) via ANOVA, F(3, 1484) = 359.30, p < 0.001, d = 1.28. A post-hoc Tukey HSD test revealed that contentment (M = −1.81, SD = 2.53) was rated with the lowest activation score compared to the other three emotions, happiness (M = 2.00, SD = 2.05), p < 0.001, 95% CI [3.47, 4.15], relief (M = −1.15, SD = 2.51), p < 0.001, 95% CI [0.32, 1.00], and joy (M = 2.60, SD = 1.84), p < 0.001, 95% CI [4.07, 4.75].
Significant differences in pleasantness were found among the four emotions using an ANOVA, F(3, 1516) = 86.43, p < 0.001, d = 0.527. A post-hoc Tukey HSD test revealed that contentment (M = 2.98, SD = 2.05) was perceived as lower in pleasantness compared to happiness (M = 4.20, SD = 1.30), p < 0.001, 95% CI [0.98, 1.46] and joy (M = 4.22, SD = 1.24), p < 0.001, 95% CI [1.00, 1.48]; but perceived with similar levels of pleasantness as the emotion of relief (M = 2.82, SD = 1.63), p = 0.49, 95% CI [−0.40, 0.08].
Significant differences in temporal orientation were found among the four emotions using an ANOVA, F(3, 1504) = 19.138, p < 0.001, d = 0.266. A post hoc Tukey HSD test showed that contentment (M = 0.54, SD = 1.81) was rated as more present-orientated than joy (M = 1.03, SD = 1.76), p = 0.002, 95% CI [0.21, 0.77].
Finally, significant differences in perceived acquisition orientation were found among the four emotions using an ANOVA, F(3, 1520) = 76.45, p < 0.001, d = 0.544. A post hoc Tukey HSD test showed that contentment (M = 1.08, SD = 2.08) was perceived with lower acquisition orientation than happiness (M = 2.48, SD = 2.01), p < 0.001, 95% CI [1.10, 1.70] and joy (M = 2.60, SD = 1.94), p < 0.001, 95% CI[1.22, 1.82], but not from relief (M = 0.96, SD = 1.83), p = 0.822, 95% CI [−0.42, 0.73].
Study 2 provided broader support for the outcomes of Study 1 using a dimensional approach and found that contentment is distinguishable from happiness, joy, and relief along four key dimensions. Consistent with the literature and Study 1, participants rated contentment and relief as low-activation pleasant emotions, while happiness and joy were rated as high-activation pleasant emotions. Contentment was also perceived to have lower pleasantness and lower acquisition orientation than both happiness and joy, as well as lower on activation compared to relief. Temporally, contentment and relief were rated as more present-oriented emotions, while happiness and joy were rated as more future-oriented. We have shown that emotions may be subjectively perceived as more or less similar in general (Study 1) and along certain dimensions (Study 2). Next, we explore how these emotions may be experienced in qualitatively different ways (Study 3).
11 Study 3
In Study 3, we used free-response narratives (Haidt & Keltner, 1999) where we asked participants to write a short, 4–5 sentence story describing a time when they felt contentment, happiness, joy, or relief. To provide further support for Study 1 and 2’s findings, we focused on the activation, pleasantness, temporal orientation, and acquisition orientation dimensions. We hypothesized that contentment stories would be reliably differentiated from the comparison emotions across the four rating dimensions and would be low arousal, pleasant, present-moment oriented, and non-acquisition orientated by comparison.
12 Method
12.1 Participants
We collected data from 41 U.S.-based MTurk-workers, each of which received approximately $0.85 for their participation in this 5-min study (Mage = 39.48, SDage = 12.73, 55% female). Based on previous work on open-ended methods for studying emotions (Haidt & Keltner, 1999), a sample size of 40 participants was deemed as sufficient for detecting differences in emotions.
12.2 Measures
Activation. The instructions defined emotions that are more activating as feeling more intense and energizing. Ratings were made on a scale from −5 (low activation) to 5 (high activation), where zero was ‘neutral’.
Pleasantness. The instructions defined pleasantness as a feeling of positivity, pleasure, or generally ‘feeling good’, versus negativity, pain, or generally ‘feeling bad’. Ratings were made on a scale from −5 (unpleasant) to 5 (pleasant), where zero was ‘neutral’.
Temporal orientation. The instructions stated that some emotions orient us to the past, present, or future. Ratings were made on a scale from −5 (past) to 5 (future), where zero indicated ‘the present’.
Acquisition orientation. The instructions stated that some emotions focus on needing to acquire more in life, while others focus on having all needs met (e.g., money, love, friends). Ratings were made on a scale from −5 (less) to 5 (more), where zero indicated ‘enough’.
12.3 Procedure
Participants were instructed to write a series of short stories about past circumstances under which they felt four positive emotions: contentment, happiness, relief, and joy. After the stories were collected, target emotion words were removed from the text and the stories were rated along the target dimensions by two naïve coders. Additionally, the coders were asked to guess which target emotion each story was about, in order to ascertain the relative distinctiveness of each type of story. Interrater reliability was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC; Shrout & Fleiss, 1979). See Table 3 for ICC results. Given that the ICC for the pleasantness dimension was not within the acceptable range (ICC = 0.224), we do not include this in the analyses below and focus on the other three dimensions. We arrived at our final ratings by averaging the responses of the two coders.
13 Results and Brief Discussion
Due to the large number of tests (6 tests for each dimension yielding a total of 24 tests), we used the False Discovery Rate (FDR) correction to interpret statistical significance (Benjamini & Hochberg, 1995). FDR correction compares the largest p-value to the set alpha level (i.e., 0.05), and then compares each descending p-value to an increasingly smaller alpha level. We selected the critical p-value from set of tests and applied FDR correction to each p-value separately for each dimension. FDR-corrected p-values (psFDR) and uncorrected 95% CIs are reported. Results that were significant after FDR correction are interpreted as reliable and results that were significant before FDR correction (i.e., 95% CIs that do not contain 0) are considered suggestive.
There was an overall difference by emotion condition for perceived activation, F(3, 163) = 34.30, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.393. The Tukey HSD post-hoc tests demonstrated that contentment (M = −0.12, SD = 1.28) had significantly lower ratings of activation compared to joy (M = 2.40, SD = 1.21), pFDR = 0.008, 95% CI [−3.21, −1.83], happiness (M = 1.96, SD = 1.03), pFDR = 0.017, 95% CI [−2.77, −1.39], and relief ratings (M = 1.16, SD = 1.23), pFDR = 0.025, 95% CI [−1.96, −0.58]. Relief also differed significantly from both happiness, pFDR = 0.042, 95% CI [−1.49, −0.13]. and joy, pFDR = 0.033, 95% CI [−1.93, −0.57]. Happiness and joy did not differ significantly along the activation dimension, pFDR = 0.05, 95% CI [−1.12, 0.24].
There were significant differences in ratings of temporal orientation between the emotion categories, F(3, 163) = 12.68, pFDR < 0.001, η2 = 0.193. The Tukey HSD post hoc test showed that contentment stories (M = 0.23, SD = 1.04) were significantly different in temporal orientation from happiness (M = 1.57, SD = 1.34), pFDR = 0.017, 95% CI [−2.03, −0.65], relief (M = 1.58, SD = 1.01), pFDR = 0.008, 95% CI [−2.04, −0.67], and joy (M = 1.56, SD = 1.31), pFDR = 0.025, 95% CI [−2.02, −0.64]. There were no significant differences among the other comparisons among the positive emotions, pFDRs < 0.05. These results suggest that contentment stories are uniquely attuned to the present moment.
There were significant differences between emotional categories on acquisition orientation, F(3, 163) = 18.24, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.256. The Tukey HSD tests indicated significant differences between contentment (M = 0.28, SD = 1.02) and two of the comparison emotions, happiness (M = 1.90, SD = 1.32), pFDR = 0.017, 95% CI [−2.36, −0.88], and joy (M = 1.92, SD = 1.58), pFDR = 0.008, 95% CI [−2.38, −0.89]. Contentment and relief (M = 0.60, SD = 1.11) were not significantly different from each other, pFDR = 0.042, 95% CI [−1.05, 0.43], nor were happiness and joy, pFDR = 0.05, 95% CI [−0.75, 0.72]. Relief was significantly different from happiness, pFDR = 0.033, 95% CI [0.58, 2.04] and joy, pFDR = 0.025, 95% CI [−2.05, −0.59]. Our hypothesis was mostly supported as contentment stories were rated significantly lower in preoccupation with acquisition compared to happiness and joy, but not relief.
After our naïve coders rated the emotion stories along the above dimensions, they were asked to identify the emotion associated with each story. We calculated the percentage of correct guesses and calculated whether they were able to correctly categorize the stories at above-chance rates. We conducted non-parametric t-tests comparing the proportion of correct guesses to chance (0.25) for each of the four emotion categories. All of the proportions were significantly greater than chance: t = 10.73, p < 0.001 for contentment; t = 3.57, p < 0.001 for happiness; t = 13.12, p < 0.001 for relief; t = 5.55, p < 0.001 for joy. A confusion matrix is provided in Table 4, which illustrates the guessing frequency for each story and answer type.
To test whether contentment stories were more readily distinguishable from the group, we cross-tabulated the frequencies of correct guesses and conducted a Pearson chi-square analysis testing the association between emotion category and guessing accuracy, which was statistically significant, χ2 (6, N = 158) = 37.923, p < 0.001. The Phi and Cramer’s V tests of association strength were both significant as well, p < 0.001. The cross-tabulation revealed a higher frequency of instances when both coders correctly guessed the emotion for contentment (75.7%) and relief (80.5%) than for happiness (28.6%) and joy (36.8%). These findings provide additional support for contentment as reliably distinguishable from happiness, and for happiness as less distinguishable from other positive emotions. Even though contentment and relief were similar along many dimensions, contentment was consistently rated as lower in activation than relief in both Study 2 and 3.
14 Study 4
Studies 1–3 provided evidence that contentment is unique from three comparison positive emotions, and this set the stage for investigations into the traits of the dispositionally contented individual. Across two investigations in Study 4 and Study 5, we ascertained the extent to which dispositional contentment is associated with key wellbeing outcomes, such as psychological wellbeing, subjective wellbeing, and self-acceptance.
Especially pertinent to this discussion is the question of whether dispositional contentment is associated with these outcomes above and beyond other emotion dispositions, like amusement, awe, compassion, joy, love, and pride. Study 4 tested the hypothesis that dispositional contentment predicts psychological wellbeing and satisfaction with life, two cornerstone wellbeing measures, above and beyond six other positive emotions from the Dispositional Positive Emotion Scale (Piff, et al., 2015; Shiota et al., 2006).
15 Method
15.1 Participants
We recruited 227 (Mage = 33.83, SDage = 10.89, 44.5% female) U.S.-based MTurk-workers who participated in a 4.5 min study and received $0.75 (rate of $10/hr) for their participation. The Institutional Review Board at Yale University approved this study.
15.2 Procedure
Participants were asked to complete an online battery of surveys presented in random order.
15.3 Measures
See Table 5 for means, standard deviations, and Cronbach’s alpha for each scale and subscale.
Dispositional Positive Emotion Scales. The Dispositional Positive Emotion Scales (DPES; Shiota et al., 2006) is a 38-item questionnaire that measures individual dispositions to experience discrete positive emotions (including contentment and other comparison emotions), using a scale from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree. A sample item for happiness is “On a typical day, many events make me happy”.
Satisfaction with Life. The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWL; Diener et al., 1985) is a 5-item self-report measure that uses a scale from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree. Sample items include “I am satisfied with my life.”
Ryff Scale of Psychological Wellbeing. The Ryff Scale of Psychological Wellbeing (PWB; Ryff & Keyes, 1995) is a 42-item measure with six subscales: Self-Acceptance, Positive Relations with Others, Sense of Autonomy, Environmental Mastery, Purpose in Life, and Personal Growth, all rated from 1 = strongly disagree to 6 = strongly agree. Self-acceptance here was measured as a facet of psychological well-being. It is conceptually similar to unconditional self-acceptance measured in Study 5, but the subscale of PWB additionally emphasizes an achieved sense of well-being (e.g., “When I look at the story of my life, I am pleased with how things have turned out”) beyond the psychological tendencies of avoiding social comparisons or embracing both positive and negative self-aspects.
16 Results and Brief Discussion
Prior to conducting a hierarchical multiple regression, the relevant assumptions of this statistical analysis were tested. Firstly, a sample size of 135 was deemed adequate given nine independent variables to be included in the analysis (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001). The assumption of singularity was also met as the independent variables (i.e., the emotions) were not a combination of other independent variables. An examination of correlations (see Table 5) revealed that no variables were highly correlated with contentment, with the exceptions of joy, pride, and love (i.e., similar to the high intercorrelations in the original paper by Shiota et al., 2016). Upon further examination of the tolerance statistics (see Table 6) for these correlations, we found no violations of multicollinearity, as all tolerance values were above 0.10; the minimum tolerance value was 0.253. Further, no Variance Inflation Factors (VIF) exceeded 10; the largest was 3.959.
A three-step hierarchical multiple regression was conducted with psychological well-being subscales, psychological well-being, and satisfaction with life as the dependent variables. At step one, age and gender were entered to control for the effects of demographics on well-being outcomes. At step two, all of the positive emotions (except contentment) were entered. At the last step, contentment was added to the model to test how much additional variance it accounted for above and beyond the other positive emotions.
Given that the current investigation is interested in the additional variance predicted by contentment, we focus our analysis and discussion on the final step of the regression model. For all dependent variables except autonomy and personal growth, the addition of contentment to the regression model explained a significantly greater proportion of the variation in well-being. This change in R2 was consistently significant (see Table 7 for full results). These results support our hypothesis that dispositional contentment uniquely contributes to higher psychological well-being and life satisfaction above and beyond other positive emotions.
17 Study 5
Study 5 extends the findings of Study 4 by examining whether dispositional contentment is associated with unconditional self-acceptance, a psychological outcome strongly related to psychological health (Chamberlain & Haaga, 2001), above and beyond other positive emotions. It has been theorized that the main appraisal of contentment is a sense of completeness or wholeness (Cordaro, et al., 2016a), which has been operationalized as unconditional self-acceptance in previous studies (Flett, et al., 2003). We therefore hypothesized that contentment would associate with unconditional self-acceptance above and beyond other positive emotion dispositions.
18 Method
18.1 Participants
Participants (N = 245, Mage = 35.11, SDage = 11.37, 45.8% female) were U.S. based MTurk-workers who participated in a three-minute study and received $0.50 (rate of $10/hr) for their participation.
18.2 Procedure
Participants were presented online with the aforementioned measures in random order. The Institutional Review Board at Yale University approved this study.
18.3 Measures
See Table 8 for means, standard deviations, and Cronbach’s alpha for each scale and subscale.
Dispositional Positive Emotion Scales. See description in the methods of Study 4.
Unconditional Self-Acceptance. The Unconditional Self-Acceptance questionnaire (Chamberlain & Haaga, 2001) is a 20-item self-report questionnaire that measures the extent to which a person unconditionally accepts themselves using a scale from 1 = almost always untrue to 7 = almost always true. A positively-keyed item example is “I avoid comparing myself to others to decide if I am a worthwhile person”, and a negatively-keyed item example is “I set goals for myself that I hope will prove my worth”. A positively-keyed sample item is “I feel worthwhile even if I am not successful in meeting certain goals that are important to me”. A negatively-keyed sample item is “To feel like a worthwhile person, I must be loved by the people who are important to me”.
19 Results and Brief Discussion
Prior to conducting a hierarchical multiple regression, the relevant assumptions of this statistical analysis were tested. Firstly, a sample size of 135 was deemed adequate given nine independent variables to be included in the analysis (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001). The assumption of singularity was also met as the independent variables (i.e., the emotions) were not a combination of other independent variables. An examination of correlations (see Table 8) revealed that no variables were highly correlated with contentment, with the exception of joy, pride, and love. However, as shown in Table 9, an examination of tolerance statistics confirmed no violations of multicollinearity; all tolerance values were above 0.10, and the minimum tolerance value was 0.251. Further, no Variance Inflation Factors (VIF) exceeded 10; the largest was 3.977 (Table 9). Given that we are interested in the predictive abilities of contentment above and beyond these other positive emotions, we still included them as covariates and presented the zero-order correlations to demonstrate the main effects of contentment without controlling for other inter-correlated positive emotions.
A three-step hierarchical multiple regression was conducted with unconditional self-acceptance as the dependent variable. At step one, age and gender were entered to control for the effects of demographics on well-being outcomes. At step two, all of the comparison positive emotions were entered. At the last step, contentment was added to the model to test how much additional variance it accounted for above and beyond the other positive emotions. The addition of Contentment to the regression model explained a significantly greater proportion (i.e., 32% vs. 30%) of the variation in unconditional self-acceptance (see Table 10 for full results).
20 Study 6
Studies 4 and 5 together highlight the importance of contentment to human wellbeing above and beyond more well-studied positive emotions. However, the directionality of this relationship remained ambiguous. In our final study, we induced feelings of contentment and comparison states (i.e., pride and joy) and compared their impact on unconditional self-acceptance. Like contentment, pride is also based on a generally positive evaluation of self worth (Scheff et al., 1989), but contentment does not necessarily follow of positive external events (e.g., achievements). Joy is also a positive emotion but may have slightly higher arousal (Cordaro et al., 2016a; Shiota et al., 2007).
The induction task involved writing about a prototypical experience of the target emotion, a method that has been well-validated in past studies (Griskevicius et al., 2010). To further ascertain contentment’s unique impact upon the self, we contrasted the effect of contentment with two other similar positive emotions: pride and joy. Like contentment, pride is also related to changes in positive appraisal of the self (Scheff, Retzinger, & Ryan, 1989). Similarly, joy is one of the most well-studied positive emotions in the psychological sciences, and it has been widely used as a contrast emotion in previous emotion research (Shiota, Kelnter, & Mossman, 2007). Finally, guided by existing findings on self-acceptance association with wellbeing (Chamberlain & Haaga, 2001) as well as our finding from Study 4 on contentment and uplifted life satisfaction, we predicted that contentment, through an increased sense of self-acceptance, will enhance people’s wellbeing (Hypothesis 2).
21 Method
21.1 Participants
A total of 338 college students at a major public West Coast university participated in exchange for course credit. Thirty-eight participants who failed more than one attention check (out of seven checks) were excluded. The final sample consisted of 300 students (84 male, M = 20.45, SD = 2.26). The ethnic distribution of this sample was as follows: 51.7% were Asian or Asian American, 24.7% were European American, 12% were Latino/Latina, 8.0% were mixed race, and 0.7% were African American. Based on established significant mediation effects in previous emotion research (Bai et al., 2017), a sample size of 242 participants was deemed as sufficient for detecting indirect effects.
21.2 Procedure
After giving consent, participants were randomly assigned to an emotion story condition, and instructed to recall and write about a personal experience of either contentment, pride, or joy (Ncontentment = 96, Npride = 108, Njoy = 96). Participants were then asked to report on their levels of self-acceptance and life satisfaction. This study was approved by the Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects, at the University of California, Berkeley.
21.3 Measures
Affective state elicitation. Participants were randomly assigned to describe a particular experience that elicited contentment, pride, or joy. Participants were provided with the definition of each target emotion, and the instructions emphasized a focus on providing concrete, vivid, experiential details (Strack et al., 1985). See Supplemental Materials for the definitions presented in this study.
Self-acceptance. To measure self-acceptance, we used the 3-item Self-Acceptance Scale (Arıcak, 2015) using a scale from 0 to 9 with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.66. Participants saw the question “As you consider yourself as a human with your all characteristics (good and bad), how much do you accept your characteristics and behaviors?” and rated the extent to which they accept their “good and nice”, “bad and ugly” or “good and bad” characteristics from 0 (“I cannot acceptance any … characteristic I have”) to 0 (“I accept all.. characteristics I have”).
Unconditional self-acceptance. See description in methods of Study 5.
Satisfaction with Life. See the description of this measure in the methods section of Study 4.
Manipulation Checks. Participants reported the degree to which they felt each of nine affective states during the experience they wrote about. The emotions included in the manipulation check rating were contentment, joy, pride, sadness, fear, anger, and gratitude. The rating scale ranged from 1 = not at all to 7 = extremely.
22 Results and Brief Discussion
22.1 Manipulation Checks
Participants in the contentment condition (M = 5.19, SD = 1.68) reported significantly higher levels of contentment during their emotional recalling task relative to those in the pride (M = 4.60, SD = 1.72) or joy (M = 4.69, SD = 2.01) condition, F(2, 297) = 3.03, p = 0.05, ηp2 = 0.02, providing evidence for the effectiveness of the emotion manipulation.
22.2 Contentment Experience and Self-Acceptance
We first conducted a 3-way (emotion condition: contentment vs. pride vs. joy) ANOVA treating the self-acceptance score as the dependent variable. The results yielded a significant effect of emotion condition on self-acceptance, F(2, 297) = 5.98, p < 0.01, ηp2 = 0.04. Furthermore, we conducted two orthogonal contrasts. In the first contrast (“contentment contrast”), we examined whether the participants primed with contentment (M = 7.56, SD = 1.18) reported greater self-acceptance than those in the pride (M = 7.00, SD = 1.45) and joy (M = 6.95, SD = 1.47) conditions (coded as contentment = 2, pride = −1, joy = −1). In the second contrast (“positive contrast”) we tested the residual difference between the pride and joy conditions (coded as contentment = 0, pride = 1, joy = −1). As predicted, the contentment contrast was significant, F(1, 297) = 11.95, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.04, while the positive contrast was not, F(1, 298) = 0.06, p = 0.80.
A similar ANOVA on unconditional self-acceptance revealed the same pattern. While the main effect of emotion condition was not significant, F(2, 297) = 2.75, p = 0.07, ηp2 = 0.02, the same two orthogonal revealed that contentment (M = 82.17, SD = 1.27), compared to pride (M = 78.33, SD = 1.20) and joy (M = 78.98, SD = 1.23) condition, led to a higher level of unconditional acceptance of the self. The contentment contrast was significant, F(1, 297) = 5.29, p = 0.02, ηp2 = 0.02, while the positive contrast was not significant, F(1, 297) = 0.14, p = 0.71. The above two contrast analyses indicate that the group of participants who experienced contentment reported higher acceptance of the self (i.e., as measured by either scale) than the other two groups who experienced pride or joy.
To test whether feelings of contentment would correlate with levels of self-acceptance, we created a composite of the self-acceptance score and unconditional self-acceptance score, by standardizing and calculating the sum of these two measures (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.52; expectedly lower given that we are combining only two measures, similar to using a two-item scale). Across three emotion eliciting situations, participants’ reported contentment intensity was significantly correlated with the composite of self-acceptance, b = 0.34, p < 0.01.
22.3 Contentment, Self-Acceptance, and Wellbeing
Finally, we tested our hypothesis regarding contentment’s positive impact on wellbeing. Consistent with Hypothesis 2, a similar ANOVA on life satisfaction was significant, F(2, 297) = 3.80, p = 0.02, ηp2 = 0.03. Furthermore, we conducted the same two orthogonal contrasts to test whether contentment (M = 4.86, SD = 1.27), compared to pride (M = 4.46, SD = 1.35) and joy (M = 4.36, SD = 1.37), increased the level of life satisfaction. As expected, the contentment contrast was significant, F(1, 298) = 7.41, p < 0.01, ηp2 = 0.02, while the positive contrast was not significant, F (1, 298) = 0.28, p = 0.60.
Next, to test our final hypothesis, we performed a mediation analysis to test whether contentment, through increasing the sense of self-acceptance, promotes an individual’s wellbeing. We tested the proposed mediating effect using a bootstrapping procedure for mediator models recommended by Preacher and Hayes (2004, 2008). Analyses were conducted with the PROCESS macro for SPSS (Hayes, 2012) using 5,000 bootstrap samples. Figure 2 illustrates the mediation model and provides path coefficients. As shown, the positive association between contentment-eliciting conditions (in contrast to pride and joy conditions) and life satisfaction level became nonsignificant (95% CI [−0.01, 0.20]) when self-acceptance was included in the model, and we found a significant mediation pathway through self-acceptance (indirect effect = 0.05, SE = 0.02, 95% CI [0.02, 0.09]).
The results of Study 6 extended our understanding of the direction of impact between contentment and wellbeing. First, consistent with our hypothesis, our results suggest that contentment, compared to other positive emotions such as pride and joy, uniquely promotes a sense of self-acceptance, unconditional self-acceptance, and satisfaction with life. Moreover, we found causal evidence showing that contentment, through the increased level of self-acceptance, uplifts an individual’s life satisfaction.
22.4 General Discussion
The present multi-method research provides evidence for contentment as a perceived unique positive emotion that is associated with wellbeing. Across six studies, we found empirical evidence to support this central hypothesis. In keeping with our first hypothesis, we found that individuals believe that contentment differs from other similar emotions across multiple dimensions. Specifically, contentment was perceived to be lower in arousal, more neutral in valence, lower in acquisition orientation, and more present-oriented compared to other positive emotions such as happiness, joy, and relief. Results from our subsequent free-response narrative studies replicated these findings. Together, these results demonstrated that contentment can be considered a unique perceived emotion across multiple affective dimensions.
Consistent with our second hypothesis, contentment significantly predicted psychological wellbeing and life satisfaction across both trait (Study 4 and 5) and state levels (Study 6). The effect held even after controlling for other positive emotions that previous literature has identified as strong predictors for wellbeing, such as happiness (Diener, 2000) and joy (Fredrickson & Joiner, 2002). Furthermore, dispositional contentment was the strongest predictor of self-acceptance, environmental mastery, purpose in life, and overall satisfaction with life. This indicates that contentment is likely a critical emotion to cultivate for improved wellbeing outcomes in life. Lastly, through the experimental manipulation of contentment, we found that self-acceptance mediates the relationship between contentment and life satisfaction, providing empirical evidence to explain contentment’s unique association with psychological well-being outcomes.
Our findings advance research in emotions and wellbeing in two key ways. Firstly, these studies are the first to systematically differentiate contentment from other related positive emotions of varying degrees of arousal/activation, such as happiness, joy, pride, and relief. In the past, emotion research has focused on happiness as the primary predictor of emotional wellbeing. However, emerging research has begun to test the distinctions between discrete positive emotions and their social and cognitive impacts. For example, several studies have explored the distinct functions of awe, as they relate to stronger connections to collective social entities (Shiota et al., 2007), an increased motivation to assist others (Piff, et al., 2015), and a diminished sense of self (Bai et al., 2017). Other studies have explored the particular outcomes of gratitude such as lower levels of materialism (McCullough et al., 2002) and boosted levels of positive memory retrieval (Watkins et al., 2008). Just as these studies highlighted the unique combinations of outcomes that differentiate these emotions, the results of this series of studies suggest that contentment has its own set of unique characteristics that differentiate it from similar emotions such as happiness, joy, and relief. By differentiating contentment from other related positive emotions and also by differentiating these emotions from each other, this work builds on research aiming to capture discrete differences in positive emotions (e.g., Cowen & Keltner, 2017; Tong, 2015a).
Secondly, this research highlights the importance of exploring the associations between contentment and wellbeing. Much of the research exploring the relationship between wellness outcomes and emotions has focused on high-arousal emotions that activate the autonomic nervous system, as opposed to relaxing it (Keltner & Lerner, 2010). The burgeoning research on emotional granularity (i.e., representing discrete emotional states with precision and specificity) suggests that being able to experience different positive emotions as distinct is associated with resilient coping and adjustment outcomes (e.g., Tugade et al., 2004). If well-being research heavily focusing on high-arousal positive emotions or global happiness, we may lack understanding of the full spectrum of people’s positive emotional experiences and the unique roles of specific emotions in enhancing wellbeing (Fredrickson & Cohn, 2008). For example, low-arousal emotions such as contentment and calm are often associated with an activation of the parasympathetic nervous system, which soothes and relaxes the body (Richardson et al., 2016) and promotes the release of oxytocin, a hormone associated with compassion and pleasure (Kringelbach & Berridge, 2017). Thus, our research encourages the incorporation of low-arousal positive emotional experiences as a predictor of hedonic and eudaimonic well-being.
22.4.1 Limitations and Future Directions
Despite the contributions of our research to the study of positive emotions, well-being, and social psychology more broadly, our studies are not without their limitations, which will need to be addressed in subsequent research. Firstly, as mentioned previously in the paper, the reliance on MTurk samples, while accepted as a reasonably reliable source of data, comes with its issues regarding generalizability and data quality that must be considered when interpreting our findings. Furthermore, we relied on self-reported measurements for evaluating contentment as well as other variables (e.g., life satisfaction, self-acceptance), and so it is possible that shared semantics and experiences of contentment and the outcome variables may limit our understanding of the predictive validity of contentment. With this limitation in mind, future studies should use alternative forms of measurement (e.g., experience sampling methodology, physiological measures, behavioral responses) in order to more rigorously evaluate the association between contentment and the outcome variables in question.
While our findings support both of our hypotheses, our studies only included participants from the United States, a culture that favors high-arousal positive experiences (Tsai, 2007). Future work may consider replicating these studies with participants outside of the United States. It is possible that other cultures may understand contentment differently, especially those rooted in Taoism or Buddhism, which regard the experience of contentment as the pinnacle of human wellbeing (Carter, 2000). Similar studies in these cultures may find a greater difference between contentment and high-arousal positive emotions, as it is possible that these two emotions are not synonymous to populations outside of the United States. In addition, there may be significant cultural differences in the value of contentment and how strongly experiencing contentment is associated with well-being. Tsai (2007) found that American culture values high-arousal positive emotions more than low-arousal positive emotions, while East Asian cultures value the latter. While the studies conducted by Tsai demonstrate this difference, they did not specifically explore contentment.
Finally, even though this research conceptually mapped the dimensional placement of contentment and related emotions using both quantitative and qualitative approaches, we found limited evidence that suggests clear differences between contentment and other low-arousal positive emotions (e.g., relief). For example, contentment was consistently rated as lower in activation compared to relief, while the difference between the two emotions in acquisition and temporal orientations were inconsistent across studies. We recognize this as a limitation of the current studies and emphasize the theoretical accounts of how contentment and related states may be similar yet conceptually non-redundant (e.g., Cordaro et al., 2016a). Future studies should focus on the family of low-arousal positive emotions and emotion-like states (e.g., peace, calmness, tranquility, relief) to map the similarities and differences between these states in more fine-grained ways.
Another important limitation to address is with respect to the concept of “unconditionality” as it relates to human emotion. Emotions are thought to arise as the result of environmental appraisals relevant to the self and the self’s goals, and therefore a ‘condition’ must be met for an emotion to arise (Ellsworth, 2013). While these studies provide evidence of a relationship between the experience of contentment and unconditional self-acceptance, further research will be necessary to understand if self-acceptance can ever truly be ‘unconditional’, and whether contentment arises as a result of this self-perception. Self-acceptance has also been a key ingredient in other related experiences, such as the emotion of equanimity and “the quiet ego” (Bauer & Weatherbie, 2023). Equanimity involves accepting both positive and negative aspects of the self and others with compassion, curiosity, and a long-term orientation towards self-development. More research is called for to disentangle these emotions and identify shared active ingredients (e.g., self-acceptance).
The results of the current studies provide important new evidence for contentment as a discrete emotion that promotes wellbeing through the experience of self-acceptance. This research contributes to a growing body of work that demonstrates the importance of considering the unique associations of discrete, low-arousal positive emotions with wellbeing. It also underscores the unique and critical importance of contentment on human flourishing and psychological wellbeing.
References
Arıcak, O. T., Dündar, Ş, & Saldaña, M. (2015). Mediating effect of self-acceptance between values and offline/online identity expressions among college students. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, 362–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.025
Aspinwall, L. G. (2005). The psychology of future-oriented thinking: From achievement to proactive coping, adaptation, and aging. Motivation and Emotion, 29(4), 203–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-006-9013-1
Bai, Y., Maruskin, L. A., Chen, S., Gordon, A. M., Stellar, J. E., McNeil, G. D., & Keltner, D. (2017). Awe, the diminished self, and collective engagement: Universals and cultural variations in the small self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(2), 185–209. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000087
Barrett-Cheetham, E., Williams, L. A., & Bednall, T. C. (2016). A differentiated approach to the link between positive emotion, motivation, and eudaimonic well-being. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 11(6), 595–608.
Bauer, J. J., & Weatherbie, K. J. (2023). The Quiet Ego and Human Flourishing. Journal of Happiness Studies, pp. 1–32.
Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (methodological), 57(1), 289–300.
Bigné, J. E., & Andreu, L. (2004). Emotions in segmentation: An empirical study. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(3), 682–696.
Bonanno, G., & Keltner, D. (2004). Brief Report The coherence of emotion systems: Comparing “on-line” measures of appraisal and facial expressions, and self-report. Cognition and Emotion, 18(3), 431–444. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930341000149
Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 3–5. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610393980
Carter, J. (2000). Verse 204 in The Dhammapada. Oxford University Press.
Chamberlain, J. M., & Haaga, D. A. (2001). Unconditional self-acceptance and psychological health. Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 19(3), 163–176. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011189416600
Clore, G. L., & Ortony, A. (1988). Semantic analyses of the affective lexicon. In V. Hamilton, G. Bower, & N. Frijda (Eds.), Cognitive science perspectives on emotion and motivation (pp. 367–397). Martinus Nijhoff.
Connors, G. J., Toscova, R. T., & Tonigan, J. S. (1999). Serenity. In W. R. Miller (Ed.), Integrating spirituality into treatment: Resources for practitioners (pp. 235–250). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10327-012
Cordaro, D. T., Brackett, M., Glass, L., & Anderson, C. L. (2016a). Contentment: Perceived completeness across cultures and traditions. Review of General Psychology, 20(3), 221–235. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000082
Cordaro, D. T., Keltner, D., Tshering, S., Wangchuk, D., & Flynn, L. M. (2016b). The voice conveys emotion in ten globalized cultures and one remote village in Bhutan. Emotion, 16(1), 117–128. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo000010
Cordaro, D. T., Keltner, D., Tshering, S., Wangchuk, D., & Flynn, L. M. (2016c). The voice conveys emotion in ten globalized cultures and one remote village in Bhutan. Emotion, 16(1), 117.
Cordaro, D. (2021, in press). Contentment - The Evolution of Indestructible Wellbeing. Oxford Handbook of Evolution and the Emotions.
Cowen, A. S., & Keltner, D. (2017). Self-report captures 27 distinct categories of emotion bridged by continuous gradients. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(38), E7900–E7909. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1702247114
Crocker, J., Thompson, L. L., McGraw, K. M., & Ingerman, C. (1987). Downward comparison, prejudice, and evaluations of others: Effects of self-esteem and threat. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(5), 907.
Davies, M. F. (2008). Irrational beliefs and unconditional self-acceptance. II. Experimental evidence for a causal link between two key features of REBT. Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 26, 89–101.
De Rivera, J., & Páez, D. (2007). Emotional climate, human security, and cultures of peace. Journal of Social Issues, 63(2), 233–253.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Hedonia, eudaimonia, and well-being: An introduction. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9, 1–11.
Dhall, A., Asthana, A., Goecke, R., & Gedeon, T. (2011, March). Emotion recognition using PHOG and LPQ features. In Face and Gesture 2011 (pp. 878–883). IEEE.
Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist, 55(1), 34–43. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.34
Diener, E. D., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
Dolnicar, S. (2002). A review of unquestioned standards in using cluster analysis for data-driven market segmentation.
Ekman, P., & Cordaro, D. (2011). What is meant by calling emotions basic. Emotion Review, 3(4), 364–370.
Elfenbein, H. A., Beaupré, M., Lévesque, M., & Hess, U. (2007). Toward a dialect theory: Cultural differences in the expression and recognition of posed facial expressions. Emotion, 7(1), 131.
Ellis, A. (1994). Reason and emotion in psychotherapy: Revised and updated. Carol Publishing Group.
Ellsworth, P. C. (2013). Appraisal theory: Old and new questions. Emotion Review, 5(2), 125–131.
Ellsworth, P. C., & Smith, C. A. (1988). Shades of joy: Patterns of appraisal differentiating pleasant emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 2(4), 301–331.
Faustino, B., Vasco, A. B., Silva, A. N., & Marques, T. (2020). Relationships between emotional schemas, mindfulness, self-compassion and unconditional self-acceptance on the regulation of psychological needs. Res Psychother., 23(2), 442. https://doi.org/10.4081/ripppo.2020.442.PMID:33024719;PMCID:PMC7513613
Flett, G. L., Besser, A., Davis, R. A., & Hewitt, P. L. (2003). Dimensions of perfectionism, unconditional self-acceptance, and depression. Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 21(2), 119–138. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025051431957
Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). Cultivated emotions: Parental socialization of positive emotions and self-conscious emotions. Psychological Inquiry, 9, 279–281. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli0904_4
Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56, 218–226. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218
Fredrickson, B. L., & Cohn, M. A. (2008). Positive emotions. In M. Lewis, J. Haviland-Jones, & L. Barrett (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (pp. 777–796). Guilford Press.
Fredrickson, B. L., & Joiner, T. (2002). Positive emotions trigger upward spirals toward emotional well-being. Psychological Science, 13(2), 172–175. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00431
Fredrickson, B. L. (2004). The broaden–and–build theory of positive emotions. Philosophical transactions of the royal society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 359(1449), 1367–1377.
Fromm, E. (1981). Primary and secondary process in waking and in altered states of consciousness. Journal of Altered States of Consciousness, 4, 115–128.
Gaskins, R. W. (1999). “ Adding legs to a snake”: A reanalysis of motivation and the pursuit of happiness from a Zen Buddhist perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 204–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.91.2.204
Goodman, J. K., Cryder, C. E., & Cheema, A. (2013). Data collection in a flat world: The strengths and weaknesses of Mechanical Turk samples. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26(3), 213–224.
Graham, A., McCormack, T., Lorimer, S., Hoerl, C., Beck, S. R., Johnston, M., & Feeney, A. (2022). Relief in everyday life. Emotion. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0001191
Griskevicius, V., Shiota, M. N., & Neufeld, S. L. (2010). Influence of different positive emotions on persuasion processing: A functional evolutionary approach. Emotion, 10(2), 190–206. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018421
Gross, J. J., & Levenson, R. W. (1995). Emotion elicitation using films. Cognition and Emotion, 9(1), 87–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699939508408966
Groves, R. M., Fowler Jr, F. J., Couper, M. P., Lepkowski, J. M., Singer, E., & Tourangeau, R. (2011). Survey methodology (Vol. 561). John Wiley & Sons.
Haidt, J., & Keltner, D. (1999). Culture and facial expression: Open-ended methods find more expressions and a gradient of recognition. Cognition and Emotion, 13(3), 225–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/026999399379267
Harmon-Jones, E., Harmon-Jones, C., & Summerell, E. (2017). On the importance of both dimensional and discrete models of emotion. Behavioral Sciences, 7(4), 66.
Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling [White paper]. Retrieved from http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf
Hayes, S. C., Luoma, J. B., Bond, F. W., Masuda, A., & Lillis, J. (2006). Acceptance and commitment therapy: Model, processes and outcomes. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44(1), 1–25.
Hejmadi, A., Davidson, R. J., & Rozin, P. (2000). Exploring Hindu Indian emotion expressions: Evidence for accurate recognition by Americans and Indians. Psychological Science, 11(3), 183–187. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00239
Izard, C. E. (1977). Human Emotions. Plenum Press.
Jackson, T. (2002). Evolutionary psychology in ecological economics: Consilience, consumption and contentment. Ecological Economics, 41(2), 289–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00040-X
Jahoda, M. (1958). Current concepts of positive mental health. Basic Books. https://doi.org/10.1037/11258-000
Kabat-Zinn, J. (2003). Mindfulness-based interventions in context: past, present, and future.
Keltner, D., & Cordaro, D. T. (2015). Understanding multimodal emotional expressions: Recent advances in basic emotion theory. Emotion Researcher, pp. 1–17.
Keltner, D., & Lerner, J. S. (2010). Emotion. In S. Fiske & D. Gilbert (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 327–352). New York, NY: Random House. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470561119.socpsy001009
Keltner, D., Lerner, J. S., Fiske, S. T., & Gilbert, D. T. (2010). The handbook of social psychology. Emotion, pp. 317–352.
Keltner, D. & Ekman, P (2003). Part IV Introduction: Expression of emotion. In R. J.
Kernis, M. H. (2005). Measuring self-esteem in context: The importance of stability of self-esteem in psychological functioning. Journal of personality, 73(6), 1569–1605.
Kraiss, J. T., Bohlmeijer, E. T., & Schotanus-Dijkstra, M. (2023). What Emotions to Encourage? The Role of High and Low Arousal Positive Emotions in Three Randomized Controlled Trials of Different Positive Psychology Interventions. International Journal of Applied Positive Psychology, pp. 1–27.
Kreibig, S. D. (2010). Autonomic nervous system activity in emotion: A review. Biological Psychology, 84(3), 394–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2010.03.01
Kringelbach, M. L., & Berridge, K. C. (2017). The affective core of emotion: Linking pleasure, subjective well-being, and optimal metastability in the brain. Emotion Review, 9(3), 191–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073916684558
Lazarus, R. S., & Lazarus, B. N. (1994). Passion and reason: Making sense of our emotions. Oxford University Press.
Lazarus, R. S. (1999). Hope: An emotion and a vital coping resource against despair. Social research, pp. 653–678.
Lerner, J. S., & Keltner, D. (2000). Beyond valence: Toward a model of emotion-specific influences on judgement and choice. Cognition and Emotion, 14(4), 473–493. https://doi.org/10.1080/026999300402763
Likas, A., Vlassis, N., & Verbeek, J. J. (2003). The global k-means clustering algorithm. Pattern Recognition, 36(2), 451–461.
Lindquist, K. A., & Barrett, L. F. (2008). Emotional complexity. In M. Lewis, J. M. Haviland-Jones, & L. F. Barrett (Eds.), Handbook of emotions, 4 (pp. 513–530). Guilford Press.
MacQueen, J. (1967, June). Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. In Proceedings of the fifth Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability (Vol. 1, No. 14, pp. 281–297).
Mason, W., & Suri, S. (2012). Conducting behavioral research on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Behavior Research Methods, 44(1), 1–23.
McCullough, M. E., Emmons, R. A., & Tsang, J. A. (2002). The grateful disposition: A conceptual and empirical topography. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(1), 112–127. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.82.1.112
McManus, M. D., Siegel, J. T., & Nakamura, J. (2019). The predictive power of low-arousal positive affect. Motivation and Emotion, 43, 130–144.
Patañjali. (1990). Patañjali Yoga Sutras. Ramakrishna Vedanta Centre Publishing.
Picard, R. W., Vyzas, E., & Healey, J. (2001). Toward machine emotional intelligence: Analysis of affective physiological state. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 23(10), 1175–1191.
Piff, P. K., Dietze, P., Feinberg, M., Stancato, D. M., & Keltner, D. (2015). Awe, the small self, and prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(6), 883–899. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi000001
Plutchik, R. E., & Conte, H. R. (1997). Circumplex models of personality and emotions. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10261-00
Popov, S. (2019). When is unconditional self-acceptance a better predictor of mental health than self-esteem? Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 37, 251–261.
Posner, J., Russell, J. A., & Peterson, B. S. (2005). The circumplex model of affect: An integrative approach to affective neuroscience, cognitive development, and psychopathology. Development and Psychopathology, 17(3), 715–734. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579405050340
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36(4), 717–731. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206553
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
Richardson, M., McEwan, K., Maratos, F., & Sheffield, D. (2016). Joy and calm: How an evolutionary functional model of affect regulation informs positive emotions in nature. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 2, 308–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-016-0065-5
Robinson, M. D., & Clore, G. L. (2002). Belief and feeling: Evidence for an accessibility model of emotional self-report. Psychological Bulletin, 128(6), 934.
Russell, J. A. (1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(6), 1161–1178. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0077714
Russell, J. A. (1991). Culture and the categorization of emotions. Psychological Bulletin, 110(3), 426.
Russell, J. A. (2003). Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. Psychological Review, 110(1), 145.
Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 719. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.4.719
Scheff, T. J., Retzinger, S. M., & Ryan, M. T. (1989). Crime, violence, and self-esteem: Review and proposals. The Social Importance of Self-esteem, pp. 165–199. University of California Press.
Scott, J. (2007). The effect of perfectionism and unconditional self-acceptance on depression. Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 25, 35–64.
Sheldon, K. M., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2006). How to increase and sustain positive emotion: The effects of expressing gratitude and visualizing best possible selves. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(2), 73–82.
Shiota, M. N., Keltner, D., & John, O. P. (2006). Positive emotion dispositions differentially associated with Big Five personality and attachment style. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(2), 61–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760500510833
Shiota, M. N., Keltner, D., & Mossman, A. (2007). The nature of awe: Elicitors, appraisals, and effects on self-concept. Cognition and Emotion, 21(5), 944–963. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930600923668
Shrout, P., & Fleiss, J. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86(2), 420–428. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420
Sinnott, J. D., & Berlanstein, D. (2006). The importance of feeling whole: Learning to “feel connected”, community, and adult development. In C. Harole (Ed.), Handbook of adult development and learning (pp. 381–406). Oxford University Press.
Strack, F., Schwarz, N., & Gschneidinger, E. (1985). Happiness and reminiscing: The role of time perspective, affect, and mode of thinking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(6), 1460–1469. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.49.6.1460
Suzuki, D. T. (1961). Essays in Zen Buddhism. Grove Press.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). Allyn and Bacon.
Taylor, S. E., & Brown, J. D. (1988). Illusion and well-being: A social psychological perspective on mental health. Psychological Bulletin, 103(2), 193.
Tong, E. M. (2015a). Differentiation of 13 positive emotions by appraisals. Cognition and Emotion, 29(3), 484–503.
Tracy, J. L., & Matsumoto, D. (2008). The spontaneous expression of pride and shame: Evidence for biologically innate nonverbal displays. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(33), 11655–11660.
Tsai, J. L. (2007). Ideal affect: Cultural causes and behavioral consequences. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2(3), 242–259. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00043.x
Tugade, M. M., Fredrickson, B. L., & Feldman Barrett, L. (2004). Psychological resilience and positive emotional granularity: Examining the benefits of positive emotions on coping and health. Journal of Personality, 72(6), 1161–1190.
Venkatesananda, S. (2010). Vasistha’s yoga. SUNY Press.
Watkins, P. C., Cruz, L., Holben, H., & Kolts, R. L. (2008). Taking care of business? Grateful processing of unpleasant memories. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 3(2), 87–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760701760567
Weekley, E. (2012). An etymological dictionary of modern English (Vol. 2). Courier Dover Publications.
Funding
This study is not associated with any funding source.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Cordaro, D.T., Bai, Y., Bradley, C.M. et al. Contentment and Self-acceptance: Wellbeing Beyond Happiness. J Happiness Stud 25, 15 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-024-00729-8
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-024-00729-8