The Happiness Nerd — Happiness Researcher Ragnhild Bang Nes
Norwegian psychologist and happiness researcher Ragnhild Bang Nes is happy when she is researching. But the most important thing she does is disseminating her research.
When the media in Norway wants to explore a topic related to happiness, very often, they turn to Bang Nes. She frequently appears on TV and radio and in magazines — always prepared to educate the public.
The perennial question is, of course: What exactly is happiness?
–When we research, we tend to study two main types of happiness. One is hedonic happiness, which is all about “good” feelings like joy, pleasure, well-being, and contentment. In short, hedonic happiness is about feeling good. The second type is the so-called eudaimonic happiness, which is about developing one’s potential, using strengths, being engaged, having meaning, direction, autonomy, and growth. This type of happiness is about realizing oneself and functioning well as a human being, Bang Nes says.
For the Greek philosophers like Socrates, Aristotle, and Plato, this eudaimonic happiness was the very purpose of life. And importantly, happiness was not so much about pleasurable feelings but rather fundamentally tied to ethics and living according to virtues like justice and honesty.
–For them, realizing oneself or finding meaning could be pleasurable, of course. As such, eudaimonic experiences may be sources of “hedonic” feelings, so the distinction in current research can be a bit artificial. Being engaged in meaningful activities feels good. In Norway today, there is a strong focus on pleasure and well-being, often as an end in itself. But, when we ask people what kind of happiness is most important to them, eudaimonic happiness or meaningful engagement usually ranks higher than pleasure and satisfaction, Bang Nes points out.
With all the modern-day focus on “finding happiness,” Bang Nes likes to emphasize that research shows, perhaps paradoxically, that searching for happiness can make one less happy. When people get caught up in focusing on their own happiness, they may tend to care less about others. They may also spend a lot of time ruminating about whether they are happy or not.
–The strategic pursuit of happiness — to think, “I want to become happy” — often leads to less happiness because you become so engaged in constantly evaluating how happy you are. This self-focus also erodes the attention you give to others. We are very social animals. When we turn inward and focus on ourselves — on our own happiness — we become less sensitive to others. That is problematic because it is often precisely in the community with others that we find joy, happiness, and meaning, says Bang Nes.
Over the past two years, Bang Nes has worked to weave concrete results from the quality of life research into the lives of people in Norway. On behalf of the Directorate of Health, she headed a working group that prepared a tool or a system for measuring life quality in Norway.
–Isn’t Norway one of the happiest countries in the world? Why is there a need for such a measuring tool?
Bang Nes takes a deep breath. This is a common question.
–The annual World Happiness Report is based only on a single question posed to a small number of people. It asks respondents to think of a ladder, with the best possible life for them being a 10 and the worst possible life being a 0. They are then asked to rate their current lives on that 0 to 10 scale. The fact that Norwegians score very high globally on this does not tell us much besides that the polled sample of Norwegians are overall relatively satisfied with their lives.
But Bang Nes thinks such surveys obfuscate some fundamental aspects of quality of life.
–The big differences in quality of life are usually not between countries, but within a country — 80 percent are inside countries. Even in Norway, a very homogeneous country, there are significant differences across municipalities, regions and socioeconomic groups. Many people live good lives in Norway, but there are also many who struggle and constantly face challenges — advantages and disadvantages are not evenly distributed. The reason why the differences are so much greater within countries than across countries is, among other things, because factors that create major differences in life satisfaction are associated with variables like health, personality and genetics, income, social support, etc. These factors vary widely within Norway — as in all countries. The municipalities are therefore facing completely different challenges.
With feedback from colleagues worldwide, Bang Nes’s working group has compiled 155 questions — with a short battery version consisting of 23 questions.
–These questions will give us a higher-resolution picture of how people experience their lives. We do not just ask about how happy and satisfied they are, but also ask: “Do you get the public services you are entitled to?” or, regarding employment, “Are you fairly paid?”
When we speak, Bang Nes often emphasizes co-citizenship as a foundation for a living democracy — the ideal that all people — regardless of age, class, and background — should be able to function as full-fledged members of society.
–We must go out and ask people about their lives! Whether they are stressed or have any influence at work, or have access to municipal services they are entitled to. Do they face abuse of power? Do they feel bullied or left out? The municipalities must ask all this and more to build a foundation that can help promote quality of life and public health.
–Is this initiative unique to Norway?
–Many colleagues abroad have been closely involved in our work. I think Norway is quite far ahead globally, yes. Take, for example, the Public Health Act, which was passed in 2012 …
She explains that the Public Health Act aimed to lay the groundwork for community development that promotes public health and decreases social differences. Instead of placing responsibility for this in the health sector, it is now up to the political leadership to take responsibility and ensure the public health of its citizens through long-term, systematic, and knowledge-based work. And this is where Bang Nes sees the measuring tool as an important political management tool.
–One challenge with the quality of life research in Norway is that many surveys often use different questions. It’s a mess that makes it impossible to draw comparisons across groups and over time. The new measurement system will solve this problem — if used actively. And I hope it will be!
She continues.
–Health is not built in the health sector — it is created where people live and work. The health sector repairs damage. The focus of public health in Norway now is health promotion and disease prevention. That means there must be cross-sectoral cooperation, for instance, between finance, transport, and education — between all the ministries. For that reason, we do not use the terms “happiness” or “health” but “quality of life.” If you go to the Ministry of Finance and say, “We are running a happiness survey,” or “We want to promote mental health,” they say, “We do not do that.” Quality of life, however, is a priority within all sectors, so it is crucial to have a common terminology when using a cross-sectoral approach to public health.
Ever since Bang Nes defended her doctoral thesis, she has been in the limelight. Her doctoral research led to fat, flashy headlines like: “Happiness is innate.”
–Ah! I had to extinguish fires for a long time afterward. Yes, my research — and that of others — showed that genes are important to our happiness set point or baseline. But the media simplified the research, and the findings were often misunderstood. I’m constantly trying to clarify these research results to the public. The worst thing about studies related to genetics is that most people think, “That’s just the way it is. I am born sad — it’s all in my genes.” Many people simply become passive and deterministic when they read about genetic research.
–So, genes are important but not determinative?
–Our happiness baseline — whether we are naturally light-hearted or grouchy — is largely genetic. But we are constantly influenced by where we are, what we are doing, who we are with, and so forth. The light-hearted optimist can also be grumpy at times. And environmental aspects affect us most of all.
–Why is this knowledge so important for public health work?
–It is essential to be aware that environmental factors are critical. Genes do not predetermine our happiness in life, but genes are important to how we develop. To put it simply: Some people are born with a silver spoon, genetically speaking, a “lighter” disposition, which makes it easier for them to attract good life experiences and positive people. They easily establish friendships and connect well with others. It’s a positive spiral. They smile to the world, and the world smiles back at them. While those who have a “darker” baseline disposition can more easily attract a negative spiral: They may withdraw from others and get more negative feedback, have worse experiences, fewer friends, and less social support. So, there is this constant, ongoing interaction between genes and the environment. To facilitate good lives, we must better understand and contribute in ways that enhance positive development spirals for more people and break negative ones. Ultimately, the environmental factors — not genetic — are most influential in facilitating change.
Bang Nes uses herself as an example of how we are not necessarily stuck with a personality trait. Up until the last couple of years, she has had a phobia of speaking in formal settings.
–My preference has been to sit in my corner office and write. I’m a real nerd. I love to read and think and summarize information — that’s when I’m in my element. But when I had to lecture, I almost panicked. I could lie awake for weeks before I was scheduled to give a talk. It was horrible!
Bang Nes laughs.
–All the lectures I have had through the years, in the end, became like phobia therapy, in a way. Now I can give a talk without being overly stressed, I can even enjoy it! But it has required enormous discipline and hard work over fifteen years. Nevertheless, it shows how change is possible even when the starting point is terrible.
Because Bang Nes knows there is so much people can do to increase their quality of life, she is using her career to disseminate and implement research. It was her combination of research, dissemination, and practical work that the jury emphasized when Bang Nes won the Psychology Association’s award, “The Innovator of the Year,” in 2017.
In 2018, she was instrumental in building the “Everyday Happiness” initiative, a pilot project implemented in 14 municipalities in collaboration with the Council for Mental Health. In small groups, course participants try out “happiness principles” with professional course leaders.
–Based on work done in the UK, we have formulated something we call 5-a-day for everyday happiness. The New Economic Foundation (NEF) in Britain developed Five Ways to Well-being, practical life quality advice. These five principles are: Connect; Be (physically) active; Take notice; Keep learning; and Give (contribute to the lives of others). These five principles have been shown in research to increase people’s quality of life. Research shows many, often simple, activities can improve life quality — both for ourselves and others. For example, I had a psychology student who arranged a group-based sleep intervention program this past spring. Sleep deprivation is a significant public health problem. The study was relatively small and inexpensive, but the results were amazing. Increased public health does not necessarily require massive costs.
As a happiness researcher, Bang Nes thinks a lot about what she calls “happiness thieves.” She researches the consequences of bullying and emotional violence and studies parents with disabled children. She is particularly concerned about social media and the pressure it puts on young kids as they are constantly living on a stage. Overall, she is deeply interested in exploring the struggles inherent to the human condition.
Her voice gets passionate.
–A normal life is often a long uphill struggle, right? We all face so many challenges. Some are perhaps spared the worst strains, but damn. Struggling with health or other life issues is common. My colleague, Arne Holte, likes to say that life struggles are as common as the flu: We are all affected at some point. For some of us, the struggles eventually dissipate, others need help, and some die fighting these struggles.
Bang Nes lost her mother right before she turned seven years old. Her father never married again and raised his two daughters by himself.
–When I grew up, people would say: “Poor thing, you lost your mother; how terribly sad!” But to grow up with a father like mine is a great gift. Dad was a wonderful man. Of course, he probably had his weaknesses (laughs) … He had a private practice as a dentist, but it was difficult for him to take money from his patients. So, our economic situation was not that great. Also, he smoked, which meant his health was poor, and he died too early. But he was a fantastic dad. He was very social and had a great sense of humor, yet he was very reflective. Quiet and gentle. Caring and warm. He always prioritized my sister and me. He was a rare father at the time. He took part in every aspect of our lives, was a member of all the school committees, and took all school holidays with us … he was an incredibly dedicated father.
Bang Nes becomes thoughtful.
–Dad was such a solid, thoughtful, generous person who lived by his values. When I teach, I often use my dad as an example of the importance of having a value system as a compass. To live in accordance with one’s values is something that ranks high on the list of what people desire in life.
We return to her work and the quality of life measurement tool.
–This summer, Statistics Norway evaluated our questions for the new measurement system. They tried them out on a group of test respondents to see if they worked. The most interesting part was that they measured how satisfied people were with their life before and after they responded. Apparently, they were a little happier after having answered the questions (laughter). It is a small example of how things other than genes influence our quality of life!
–What is the biggest challenge when you launch the system for measuring life quality?
Her answer comes quickly.
–My biggest fear is that our work may be put away in a drawer. This is always a risk in policy-related work. It requires political will and investments.
She pauses before she finishes.
–For this important work to be a tool that can enhance lives and contribute to positive societal development, we need political support. I think regular and systematic surveys of people’s subjective quality of life, viewed in conjunction with objective data, are an excellent investment in better public health. I recently spoke with a colleague who emphasized the incredible potential of co-creative processes in local communities. Imagine if you can create good local communities with people rather than for people. Then the municipalities can become more of a meeting place for dialogue rather than an institution. I think this would be an incredibly positive development. And I hope others — including politicians — think like me and act accordingly!
The article is based on an interview with Ragnhild Bang Nes in 2018. The article was originally published in the magazine Hauste.
