Lessons from debates about foundational positive psychology theories & frameworks: Positivity Ratio, Broaden & Build, Happiness Pie, PERMA to PERMA+4

ABSTRACT

Positive psychology examines psychological phenomena that make life worth living. Critics of the field have argued that it engages in poor methodological and measurement practices. To elucidate some historical context surrounding these perceptions, and outline pathways by which positive psychological scientists may work to mitigate these perceptions, this review sought out to identify prominent lines of debate surrounding measurement and methodology. Five such debates surrounding foundational work on well-being were identified and reviewed. These involved the existence of a ‘critical’ positivity ratio that universally distinguishes flourishing and languishing individuals, positive upward spirals and whether positive emotions exhibit reciprocal causality with a broadening of thought-action repertoires and acquisition of social resources, the ‘Happiness Pie’ Model of Wellbeing and the appropriate role of mathematical analogy in conceptual theory-building, and the scientific value of well-being frameworks like PERMA and PERMA+ 4. Enclosed are lessons learned and recommendations for improving the science of positive psychology.

KEYWORDS:

• Positive psychology
• methodological debates
• methodological criticism
• well-being
• positivity ratio
• Broaden-and-Build
• positive upward spirals
• Happiness PIE
• PERMA
• PERMA+4

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

No data was explicitly collected for this project. All works reviewed in this manuscript are appropriately cited and contained in the reference section.

Additional information

Funding

This work received no institutional funding.