Content uploaded by Fallon Goodman
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Fallon Goodman on Nov 06, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Why do greater curiosity and fewer depressive symptoms predict
gratitude intervention use? Utility beliefs, social norm, and self-control
beliefs
q
Lukasz D. Kaczmarek
a
, Todd B. Kashdan
b,
⇑
, Dariusz Dra˛ _
zkowski
a
, Aleksandra Bujacz
a
,
Fallon R. Goodman
b
a
Adam Mickiewicz University, Instytut Psychologii, Ul Szamarzewskiego 89, Poznan
´, 60-568, Poland
b
George Mason University, Mail Stop 3F5, Fairfax, VA 22030, United States
article info
Article history:
Received 30 September 2013
Received in revised form 12 March 2014
Accepted 23 March 2014
Keywords:
Gratitude
Curiosity
Depression
Theory of planned behavior
abstract
Prior research found that greater trait curiosity, fewer depressive symptoms, and being a woman increase
the likelihood that a person will start a gratitude intervention on their own. Yet, little is known as to why
these individual differences lead to self-initiation. In the present study, we examined motivational mech-
anisms that might account for these effects. In-home interviews were conducted with 257 adults from
the community. Participants received a leaflet about gratitude interventions that asked about gratitude
social belief norms (what other important people they care about would do), utility and self-control
beliefs (e.g., usefulness, perceived difficulty), and intentions to start a gratitude intervention. They also
completed measures of curiosity and depressive symptoms. Afterwards, participants received codes that
allowed them to take part in a web-based gratitude intervention (strictly voluntary). Using structural
equation modeling, we found that greater trait curiosity, fewer depressive symptoms, and being a woman
indirectly led to the initiation of the gratitude intervention as a function of utility beliefs, social norm
beliefs, and perceived self-control. Results suggest specific motivational pathways through which curios-
ity, depression, and sex influence the development of grateful people.
Ó2014 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
1. Introduction
Despite the ubiquity and lucrative market, little is known about
who initiates self-help interventions and why they do. Self-help
seekers are not a homogeneous group (Parks, Della Port, Pierce,
Zilca, & Lyubomirsky, 2012) suggesting that there are problems
with one-size-all approaches for motivating people. In a recent
study, Kaczmarek and colleagues (2013) gave people information
about a website with free gratitude interventions that they could
access if they chose. Greater curiosity, fewer depressive symptoms,
and being a woman were each linked to a greater likelihood of vol-
untarily starting the gratitude intervention. To date, no research
exists on the mechanisms accounting for these effects. The primary
goal of the present study was to examine motivational factors (per-
ceptions about usefulness, social norm beliefs, self-control beliefs)
that might explain why certain individual differences (curiosity,
depression, sex) alter the likelihood of initiating a gratitude
intervention.
1.1. Gratitude interventions
Gratitude is an emotional state that occurs when an individual
attends to the benefits and gifts that are attributable to the kind-
ness of others (McCullough, Kilpatrick, Emmons, & Larson, 2001).
Intentionally attending to moments of gratitude in one’s daily
experiences has been shown to enhance positive experiences and
reduce depressive symptoms (Emmons & McCullough, 2003). Sim-
ilar effects were maintained as much as six months after the formal
intervention ended (Seligman, Steen, Park, & Peterson, 2005). Com-
pared to other positive psychological interventions, gratitude jour-
naling is perceived by recipients as more efficacious and useful
compared (Huffman et al., 2014) and it is more willingly self-initi-
ated than other interventions (Parks et al., 2012). Gratitude
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.03.032
0191-8869/Ó2014 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
q
Project supported by National Science Center Poland (N N106 291239) to
Lukasz Kaczmarek. Todd Kashdan was funded by the Center for the Advancement of
Well-Being, George Mason University.
⇑
Corresponding author. Address: Department of Psychology, MS 3F5, George
Mason University, Fairfax, VA 22030, United States. Tel.: +1 703 993 9486; fax: +1
703 993 1359.
E-mail address: tkashdan@gmu.edu (T.B. Kashdan).
Personality and Individual Differences 66 (2014) 165–170
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
interventions are particularly appealing because of their low finan-
cial cost and with minimal time commitment.
1.2. Theory of planned behavior
The theory of planned behavior (TPB; Ajzen, 1991, 2011) offers
a framework for understanding how individual differences (i.e.
curiosity, depression, sex) work in concert to understand the moti-
vation for and actual engagement in a gratitude intervention. In the
TPB human behavior is guided by three belief symptoms: the likely
consequences of the behavior (utility beliefs), the normative
expectations of highly valued people (social norm beliefs), and
the presence of factors that may hinder the behavior (self-control
beliefs). Behavioral beliefs result in a favorable or unfavorable atti-
tude toward the behavior, normative beliefs result in assumptions
about what other important people think is the best course of
action, and control beliefs result in perceptions about the difficulty
or effort required to execute a behavior. Together, these TPB com-
ponents inform behavioral intentions that can translate into actual
behavior in a given context. The TPB is particularly relevant to the
study of positive interventions. It provides evidence that account-
ing for intentions is necessary to explain relationships between
personality and behaviors, and it helps to identify specific areas
of individual differences (e.g., attitudes) that guide intentional
behaviors. Thus, TPB might help disentangle the motivation of vol-
untarily participating in a self-help intervention.
The TPB provides a guide to understanding behavioral motiva-
tions, but the foundational framework fails to account for back-
ground factors such as personality or trait-like variables. It does
not specify how and where beliefs originate. Background factors
provide critical information about possible antecedents of behav-
ioral, normative, and control beliefs. Failing to account for intention
and its motivational antecedents misses crucial information about
which individuals are likely to initiate a gratitude intervention.
1.3. Curiosity and motivation for gratitude interventions
Curious individuals might be especially likely to seek out oppor-
tunities for self-change. Curiosity involves a preference for new
and unusual activities (Spielberger & Starr, 1994). This preference
might increase the motivation to try out an intervention that
encourages new attitudes and responses to gifts received from
other people (via a gratitude intervention). Self-change is at the
minimum, mildly uncomfortable. A lack of perceived control or
wariness of uncertainty might inhibit less curious people from ini-
tiating self-change exercises. Curious people might find it easier to
participate because they believe they have the ability to effectively
cope with or make sense of the novelty, distress, and uncertainty
that accompanies lifestyle changes (Silvia, 2008).
An experimental study indicated that gratitude interventions
offer more favorable outcomes for people who are more open to
new experiences (Senf & Liau, 2012). Because curious people to have
more positive experiences and positive evaluations of themselves
and the world (Kashdan, Sherman, Yarbro, & Funder, 2013;
Kashdan & Steger, 2007), they may be motivated to initiate a grati-
tude intervention. Positive experiences ensure more opportunities
to feel and express gratitude, increasing the usefulness and ease of
gratitude exercises. Taken together, curiosity is a potential predictor
of utility, social norm, and self-control beliefs, which in turn, should
increase intentions to engage in gratitude experiments on the self.
1.4. Depression and motivation for gratitude interventions
Depressed individuals might be less likely to self-initiate behav-
ioral change. Their avoidance orientation and reduced reward
responsiveness (Henriques & Davidson, 2000) may hinder motiva-
tion towards goal-directed activities. Depressed adults have more
difficulty improving their mood through positive memories than
healthy adults (Joormann & Siemer, 2004). Consequently, more
depressed adults may expect their daily gratitude intervention to
be useless and unnecessarily difficult. Accordingly, depressive
symptoms might prevent voluntary engagement.
While depressed individuals might seek out fewer change
opportunities on their own, social factors might increase motiva-
tion. Because depressed adults have a strong need for social
approval (Zuroff, Blatt, Sanislow, Bondi, & Pilkonis, 1999), social
norms can stimulate their motivation. Perceived social pressure
motivates depressed individuals to initiate healthy lifestyle
changes (Bandura, 1998). Depressed individuals are particularly
sensitive to social rejection (Nezlek, Kowalski, Leary, Blevins, &
Holgate, 1997). If they perceive participation in the intervention
as consistent with social norms, they might be more willing to par-
ticipate in hopes of gaining social approval.
Taken together, depressed adults possess beliefs that are incon-
sistent with enjoying or benefitting from gratitude exercises. How-
ever, based on prior knowledge on the power of social influence,
we explored whether depressed adults can be motivated by social
pressure to practice gratitude.
1.5. Sex and motivation for gratitude interventions
Societal gender norms might make women more willing to
engage in gratitude interventions. In general, women tend to
express positive emotions more often (LaFrance, Hecht, & Paluck,
2003). Expressions of particular emotions can result from norma-
tive social pressures and stereotypical beliefs about gender roles
(Brody, 1999). With regards to gratitude, women are more likely
than men to experience and express grateful feelings (Kashdan,
Mishra, Breen, & Froh, 2009). Men are often socially discouraged
to experience and express their gratitude, whereas women are
encouraged.
As a result of prescribed gender roles, we expected women to
show favorable attitude towards gratitude interventions. Women
derive more benefits from gratitude, and view gratitude expression
as more interesting (Kashdan et al., 2009; Kashdan, Mishra, Breen,
& Froh, 2009). For these reasons, we expected that women would
view gratitude interventions as more useful and view social norms
as more encouraging and thus, influential in decision to initiate a
gratitude intervention.
1.6. The present study
In the present study, we applied the TPB to predict intentions
and behavioral engagement in voluntary self-change interventions,
and provide explanations for when and why positive interventions
are instilled in daily life. We sought to extend prior work that iden-
tified factors influencing the start of a gratitude intervention: high
curiosity, few depressive symptoms, and being a woman
(Kaczmarek et al., 2013). First, we tested the degree to which util-
ity beliefs, social norm beliefs, and self-control beliefs predicted
intentions and the actual start of an online gratitude intervention.
Unlike prior research that assigns gratitude interventions
(Seligman et al., 2005), we informed participants about a voluntary
intervention and observed their subsequent actions. Second, we
used utility, social norm, and self-control beliefs as mediators to
explain how curiosity, depression, and sex influence intentions
and actual behavioral engagement in a gratitude intervention.
We hypothesized that utility beliefs, social norm beliefs, and self-
control beliefs would predict intentions. Upon including individual
differences, we hypothesized that curiosity, depression, and sex
would have an indirect effect on behavior through these motiva-
tional components and intentions.
166 L.D. Kaczmarek et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 66 (2014) 165–170
2. Method
2.1. Participants
Leaflets about a gratitude intervention were given to 257 partic-
ipants at their homes. Sample inclusion criterion was being
between ages 18 and 35. Data was collected in Poland by profes-
sional researchers from a certified firm specialized in public opin-
ion polls. National census data were used to achieve a sample that
was representative of the young adult population (Table 1). Until
the quota for a specific population center size (village, town under
50,000, etc.) was achieved, addresses within this population were
randomly selected using an automated algorithm. The researchers
visited this location and conducted the survey for these randomly
selected individuals. Volunteers received no incentives and pro-
vided written informed consent. We excluded 28 participants
who indicated obstacles for completing the online intervention
(leaving for vacation or no Internet access). The remaining 228 par-
ticipants (50.2% female) were between ages 18 and 37 (M= 26.97,
SD = 5.32). Expectation–maximization algorithm in SPSS 21 was
used to impute missing data (1.3%) that were random, Little’s
chi-square test,
v
2
(186) = 209.53, p= .11. This study was approved
by the institution’s Research Ethics Committee.
2.2. Procedure
Researchers visited participants’ residences and asked to com-
plete self-report questionnaires measuring curiosity and depres-
sion. Following this, participants received leaflets describing the
gratitude intervention. After reviewing the leaflet, participants
reported their utility, social norm, and self-control beliefs regard-
ing this intervention. They were given codes to access the web-
based intervention and informed that if they wanted to participate
they should do so within the next seven days. Finally, researchers
measured intentions toward the intervention. The questionnaires
were completed in the presence of the researchers who offered
instructions to ensure privacy throughout the study.
2.3. Measures
The 10-item Curiosity and Exploration Inventory–II (Kashdan
et al., 2009) included five items assessing seeking out new knowl-
edge and experiences (e.g., ‘‘Everywhere I go, I am out looking for
new things or experiences’’) and five assessing the willingness to
tolerate the novelty and uncertainty (e.g., ‘‘I am the type of person
who really enjoys the uncertainty of everyday life’’) using a 5-point
scale from 1 ‘‘very slightly or not at all’’ to 5 ‘‘extremely’’ (
a
= .86).
The 20-item Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale
(Radloff, 1977) measured depressive symptoms with statements
such as ‘‘I had crying spells’’ and their occurrence over the last
week using a scale ranging from 0 ‘‘rarely or none of the time (less
than 1 day)’’ to 3 ‘‘most of the time or all the time (5–6 days)’’
(
a
= .84).
We used four TPB generic scales to measure utility, social norm,
and self-control beliefs, as well as behavioral intentions. These
scales were formulated according to guidelines provided by TPB
methods experts (Francis et al., 2004) and used in prior studies
(Kaczmarek et al., 2014).
Utility beliefs, or attitudes about likely consequences of the grat-
itude intervention, were assessed with three 7-point bipolar eval-
uative adjective scales: ‘‘unpleasant–pleasant’’, ‘‘bad–good’’, and
‘‘useless–useful’’ (
a
= .89).
Social norm beliefs were assessed with three items about the
expectations of important others: ‘‘Most people who matter to
me would approve my doing this intervention’’, ‘‘Most people
important to me would say it is a good idea to perform this inter-
vention’’, and ‘‘Most people important to me, would want me to
perform this intervention’’. Participants responded on 7-point
scales from 1 = ‘‘completely agree’’ to 7 = ‘‘completely disagree’’
(
a
= .88).
Self-control beliefs were measured with three items about the
perceived effort required for the intervention: ‘‘Performing this
intervention would be very easy for me’’, ‘‘If I wanted to, I could
perform this intervention without any problem’’, and ‘‘I could per-
form this interventions without difficulty’’. Participants responded
on 7-point scales from 1 = ‘‘completely agree’’ to 7 = ‘‘completely
disagree’’ (
a
= .90).
Behavioral intentions were assessed with six items about specific
actions in the intervention preceded by the phrase ‘‘I intend to...’’
and followed by: ‘‘enter the intervention website’’, ‘‘read informa-
tion from the website’’, ‘‘learn more about this positive interven-
tion’’, ‘‘try out this positive interventions’’, ‘‘complete this
positive intervention’’, ‘‘introduce this positive intervention as a
part of my life-style’’; on 7-point scales from 1 = ‘‘completely
agree’’ to 7 = ‘‘completely disagree’’ (
a
= .94).
2.4. Gratitude intervention
Participants completed the intervention through a dedicated
website that provided detailed instructions—similar to the
approach used by Seligman et al. (2005): ‘‘Write about up to three
good things that happened over the last few days. You can write
about small things or large things. Do not worry about grammar
or spelling. Do not censor yourself.’’
At baseline, participants received an invitation with individual
pin-codes to access the intervention website. To produce the mea-
sure of behavior, a value of 1 (yes) was assigned to those partici-
pants who completed a daily entry, and 0 (no) for those who did
not.
2.5. Analytical strategy
We used structural equation modeling with mPlus 7.11
(Muthén & Muthén, 2012) to test if behavior was predicted by
intentions, intentions by TPB components (utility, social norm,
and self-control beliefs), and TPB components by curiosity, depres-
sion, and sex. The WLSMV estimator was used to evaluate model fit
with a binary outcome (did the person initiate the gratitude inter-
vention?). Behavior (binary) was regressed on intention using pro-
bit regression with coefficients that represent the change in the z-
score of probit index for one unit change in the predictor; positive
values represent higher and negative values lower probability of
the intervention initiation. Linear regression was used for the
Table 1
Sociodemographic sample characteristics.
n%n%
Place of residence Occupation
Village 81 35.5 Learning 18 7.9
<50,000 47 20.6 Student 24 10.5
50,000–200,000 37 16.2 Employed 144 63.2
200,000–500,000 19 8.3 Unemployed 16 7.0
>500,000 39 17.1 Houskeeping 24 10.5
Other 1 0.4
Education Interpersonal status
Elementary 13 5.7 Married 93 40.8
Vocational 25 11.0 Engaged 7 3.1
Vocational middle 52 22.8 Cohabitation 18 7.9
Secondary 43 18.9 Dating 16 7.0
Post secondary 15 6.6 Single 85 37.3
Higher incomplete 16 7.0 Other 6 2.6
Higher 62 27.2
L.D. Kaczmarek et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 66 (2014) 165–170 167
remaining paths. The residual variance of TPB variables was freed
to correlate amongst each other in line with TPB (Ajzen, 1991).
To evaluate the model fit we calculated RMSEA with values <.06
indicating good fit and CFI with values >.90 indicating acceptable
models (Bentler, 1990). We tested indirect effects as products of
unstandardized coefficients for specific paths using bias-corrected
bootstrapping with 10,000 samples; producing point estimates and
confidence intervals (CI) for effects. Significant indirect effects are
indicated by confidence intervals that do not include zero (Table 2).
3. Results
Descriptive statistics and inter-correlations are presented in
Table 1. The gratitude intervention was initiated by 8.3% (73.7%
women) participants. The structural model presented in Fig. 1 fit
the data well,
v
2
(196) = 252.78, p< .01, RMSEA = .04, CFI = .94.
Intentions predicted self-initiation of the intervention, b= .24, SE
b= .06, p< .001. Intentions were influenced by utility, b= .33, SE
b= .11, p< .01, social norm, b= .65, SE b= .14, p< .001, and self-
control beliefs, b= .35, SE b= .12, p< .01. Curiosity predicted utility,
b= .08, SE b= .02, p< .01, social norm, b= .13, SE b= .03, p< .001,
and self-control beliefs, b= .12, SE b= 03, p< .001. Depression
was related to greater social norm, b= .06, SE b= .02, p< .05, and
less self-control beliefs, b=.05, SE b= .02, p< .05. Sex was related
to utility, b= .56, SE b= .17, p< .001 and social norm beliefs, b= .53,
SE b= .20, p< .01.
Depression had no effect on utility, b=.06, p> .05, and sex had
no effect on self-control beliefs, b= .05, p> .05. Inclusion of these
paths had no effect on the model fit,
D
v
2
(2) = 1.84, p> .05, thus
they were removed. To explore potential partial mediations of
the TPB components, we compared a model with and without
direct paths (a more parsimonious model) from background vari-
ables to intention. Intention was not predicted directly by curios-
ity, b= .05, p> .05, depression, b= .01, p> .05, nor sex, b= .01,
p> .05, and these paths did not affect the model fit,
D
v
2
(3) = 0.90, p> .05, indicating a full mediation.
There was a significant total indirect effect of curiosity on inter-
vention initiation mediated by TPB components, b= 0.036, 95% CI
[0.002, 0.080]. This total indirect effect comprised three specific
indirect effects operating through utility, b= 0.006, 95% CI [0.001,
0.028], social norm, b= 0.020, 95% CI [0.002, 0.051], and self-con-
trol beliefs, b= 0.010, 95% CI [0.001, 0.029].
Depression had an enabling indirect effect on behavior through
social norm beliefs and intention, b= 0.009, 95% CI [0.001, 0.028]
and a marginally significant inhibiting indirect effect on behavior
through self-control and intention, b=0.004, 90% CI [0.013,
0.001]. These two opposing effects canceled each other out pro-
ducing a non-significant total indirect effect of depression on
behavior through TPB components, b= 0.005, 95% CI [0.007,
0.026].
Women were more likely to initiate this intervention as
explained by TPB motivational components, a total indirect effect
Table 2
Descriptive statistics and inter-correlations among study variables.
1234567
1. Curiosity
2. Depression .18
**
3. Utility beliefs .13
.06
4. Social norm beliefs .23
**
.09 .52
**
5. Self-control beliefs .35
**
.20
**
.41
**
.34
**
6. Intention .23
**
.01 .51
**
.56
**
.41
**
7. Age .06 .03 .01 .09 .09 .09
8. Sex .19
**
.08 .22
**
.20
**
.04 .14
*
.07
9. Behavior .07 .04 .09 .13
.16
*
.23
**
.01
M
total
32.74 12.81 13.94 11.76 14.06 19.56 26.97
SD
total
6.87 9.63 3.60 3.69 3.69 11.01 5.33
M
men
34.02 12.02 13.14 11.03 13.91 17.98 26.60
SD
men
6.38 9.03 3.38 3.79 3.86 10.19 5.34
M
women
31.41 13.62 14.73 12.47 14.22 21.12 27.34
SD
women
7.12 10.20 3.65 3.45 3.53 11.65 5.33
Note: Sex coded as 0 = men, 1 = women. Behavior coded as 0 = not initiated, 1 = initiated.
p< .10.
*
p< .05.
**
p< .01.
.11
intention
depression
sex
.22**
.15*
.39***
.46***
.42***
.20**
.19**
curiosity
.22**
.35**
-.15*
.24**
.21
behavior
.45
.17
.20
social norm
beliefs
utility beliefs
self-control
beliefs
Fig. 1. A structural model for self-initiation of a gratitude intervention. Notes: standardized parameters. The percent of explained variance (R
2
) is presented in the top right
corner for each dependent variable. Sex coded as 0 = men, 1 = women.
⁄
p< .05,
⁄⁄
p< .01,
⁄⁄⁄
p< .001.
168 L.D. Kaczmarek et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 66 (2014) 165–170
b= 0.128, 95% CI [0.011, 0.302]. This total indirect effect comprised
a significant indirect effect through social norm beliefs, b= 0.083,
95% CI [0.007, 0.234], and a marginally significant indirect effect
via utility beliefs and intention, b= 0.044, 90% CI [0.005, 0.143].
4. Discussion
This study demonstrated specific motivational pathways
through which curiosity, depression, and sex influence actions
toward becoming a more grateful person. Extending prior work
on self-initiated gratitude interventions in daily life (Kaczmarek
et al., 2013), we found that TPB components fully mediated
between individual differences and behavioral intentions. Stronger
intentions to perform a gratitude intervention resulted from a
favorable attitude, social norm beliefs, and high perceived self-con-
trol about the activity. Curiosity stimulated each aspect of motiva-
tion towards the intervention (i.e., utility, social norm, and self-
control beliefs). Depressed adults displayed conflicted motives.
They felt initiation of a gratitude intervention might be valued by
people important to them, but perceived the exercise as difficult
to perform. Women maintained stronger utility beliefs and per-
ceived their involvement in this intervention to be congruent with
social norms.
Including TPB components allowed for a fine-grained analysis of
the relationship between individual differences and responses to a
gratitude intervention opportunity. Noteworthy, curiosity influ-
enced each TPB components. Such consistency explains why curi-
ous individuals took advantage of an opportunity to exercise
their gratitude. Curious participants felt more in control of a task
matching their willingness to embrace novel activities (Kashdan
et al., 2009; Kashdan, Mishra, Breen, & Froh, 2009). They expected
more benefits from the intervention and encouragement from sig-
nificant others. Curiosity was a motivational attractor making indi-
viduals more responsive to a growth opportunity. This finding
seems promising because curiosity can be trained (Proyer, Ruch,
& Buschor, 2012). Our findings provide one explanation why peo-
ple who exercise their curiosity experience greater well-being.
Depressed individuals expected exercising gratitude to be bur-
densome. Yet, depressed participants were more likely to make
an effort if they felt others approved. This finding suggests that
for mildly depressed individuals, normative beliefs serve as a moti-
vational path for starting interventions. Notably, depression was
unrelated to utility beliefs indicating that depressed individuals
were unconvinced that gratitude interventions would improve
their life. With empirical evidence for the efficacy of positive inter-
ventions in alleviating depressing symptoms, it seems imperative
to promote psychoeducation about the benefits of gratitude
interventions.
We found that women were more likely to initiate a gratitude
intervention. Women felt more certain that significant others in
their lives would approve of their behavior change. Men did not
expect similar benefits and in turn, did not endorse strong inten-
tions to start a gratitude intervention. Men also felt constrained
by social pressure. As gratitude leads to personal well-being and
contributes to society, it seems important to consider factors that
might encourage the cultivation of gratitude among men. Because
men did not perceive this gratitude intervention as more difficult
than women, addressing utility and social norm beliefs might
resolve this gender inequality.
Of the TPB model, social norm beliefs explain four times the var-
iance of intentions, utility and self-control beliefs. Clearly, when
deciding whether to engage in a gratitude intervention, individuals
mainly considered what other people might think. This phenome-
non reveals the gravity of directly targeting social contexts to max-
imize the probability that people embrace healthy interventions.
Our results correspond with experimental evidence suggesting
that social assistance enhances the effectiveness of positive inter-
ventions (Layous, Nelson, & Lyubomirsky, 2012).
One of the strengths of this study is that we approached a
diverse community sample from urban and small village settings.
Yet, some study limitations exist. We used lenient criteria to eval-
uate the self-initiation of behavior change. Participants only had to
complete one day of the gratitude intervention. A recent study that
used a similar approach found that the initiation of the interven-
tion was highly predictive of its completion (Kaczmarek et al.,
2014). Furthermore, we did not collect data on the benefits of
the intervention. Future work can explore the trajectory from first
learning about an intervention to initiation to benefits to the main-
tenance of benefits, and the individual differences that influence
each stage. Finally, although SEM allows for interpretation of cau-
sal effects (Pearl, 2012), experimental designs that directly manip-
ulate background variables (curiosity, depression) can provide
additional validity of the model.
Our results have practical implications. Given the individual
and collective benefits of gratitude, the present findings offer
insight into techniques that might persuade a large number of peo-
ple to experiment with gratitude in their lives. Our results suggest
that the effectiveness of an intervention depends on the extent to
which it influences a social norm – a robust precursor of gratitude
interventions and a mediator of intentions, trait curiosity, depres-
sive symptoms, and sex.
In sum, we integrated work on positive psychological interven-
tions with TPB to understand who works to become a grateful per-
son. We advanced understanding of the interplay between specific
individual differences and motivational factors that give rise to the
desire to enhance one’s gratitude.
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.
Ajzen, I. (2011). The theory of planned behavior: Reactions and reflections.
Psychology & Health, 26, 1113–1127.
Bandura, A. (1998). Health promotion from the perspective of social cognitive
theory. Psychology and Health, 13, 623–649.
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological
Bulletin, 107, 238–246.
Brody, L. R. (1999). Gender, emotion, and the family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Emmons, R. A., & McCullough, M. E. (2003). Counting blessings versus burdens: An
experimental investigation of gratitude and subjective well-being in daily life.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 377–389.
Francis, J. J., Eccles, M. P., Johnston, M., Walker, A. E., Grimshaw, J. M., Foy, R., et al.
(2004). Constructing questionnaires based on the theory of planned behaviour.
Tyne, UK: Centre for Health Services Research, University of Newcastle.
Henriques, J. B., & Davidson, R. J. (2000). Decreased responsiveness to reward in
depression. Cognition & Emotion, 14(5), 711–724.
Huffman, J. C., DuBois, C. M., Healy, B. C., Boehm, J. K., Kashdan, T. B., Celano, C. M.,
et al. (2014). Feasibility and utility of positive psychology exercises for suicidal
inpatients. General Hospital Psychiatry, 36(1), 88–94.
Joormann, J., & Siemer, M. (2004). Memory accessibility, mood regulation, and
dysphoria: Difficulties in repairing sad mood with happy memories? Journal of
Abnormal Psychology, 113, 179–188.
Kaczmarek, L. D., Goodman, F. R., Dra˛ _
zkowski, D., Kashdan, T. B., Połatyn
´ska, K., &
Komorek, J. (2014). Instructional support decreases desirability and initiation of
a gratitude intervention. Personality and Individual Differences, 64, 89–93.
Kaczmarek, L. D., Kashdan, T. B., Kleiman, E., Ba˛czkowski, B., Enko, B., Siebers, A.,
et al. (2013). Who self-initiates gratitude interventions in daily life? An
examination of intentions, curiosity, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction.
Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 805–810.
Kashdan, T. B., Gallagher, M. W., Silvia, P. J., Winterstein, B. P., Breen, W. E., Terhar,
D., et al. (2009a). The curiosity and exploration inventory-II: Development,
factor structure, and psychometrics. Journal of Research in Personality, 43,
987–998.
Kashdan, T. B., Mishra, A., Breen, W. E., & Froh, J. J. (2009b). Gender differences in
gratitude: Examining appraisals, narratives, the willingness to express
emotions, and changes in psychological needs. Journal of Personality, 77,
691–730.
Kashdan, T. B., Sherman, R. A., Yarbro, J., & Funder, D. C. (2013). How are curious
people viewed and how do they behave in social situations? From the
L.D. Kaczmarek et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 66 (2014) 165–170 169
perspectives of self, friends, parents, and unacquainted observers. Journal of
Personality, 81, 142–154.
Kashdan, T. B., & Steger, M. F. (2007). Curiosity and pathways to well-being and
meaning in life: Traits, states, and everyday behaviors. Motivation and Emotion,
31, 159–173.
LaFrance, M., Hecht, M. A., & Paluck, E. L. (2003). The contingent smile: A meta-
analysis of sex differences in smiling. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 305–334.
Layous, K., Nelson, S. K., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2012). What is the optimal way to
deliver a positive activity intervention? The case of writing about one’s best
possible selves. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14, 635–654.
McCullough, M. E., Kilpatrick, S. D., Emmons, R. A., & Larson, D. B. (2001). Is gratitude
a moral affect? Psychological Bulletin, 127, 249–266.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA:
Muthén & Muthén.
Nezlek, J. B., Kowalski, R. M., Leary, M. R., Blevins, T., & Holgate, S. (1997).
Personality moderators of reactions to interpersonal rejection: Depression and
trait self-esteem. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1235–1244.
Parks, A., Della Porta, M., Pierce, R. S., Zilca, R., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2012). Pursuing
happiness in everyday life: The characteristics and behaviors of online
happiness seekers. Emotion, 12, 1222–1234.
Pearl, J. (2012). The causal foundations of structural equation modeling. In R. Hoyle
(Ed.), Handbook of structural equation modeling (pp. 68–91). NJ: Guilford Press.
Proyer, R. T., Ruch, W., & Buschor, C. (2012). Testing strengths-based interventions:
A preliminary study on the effectiveness of a program targeting curiosity,
gratitude, hope, humor, and zest for enhancing life satisfaction. Journal of
Happiness Studies, 14, 275–292.
Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES–D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in
the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385–401.
Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology
progress. Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60,
410–421.
Senf, K., & Liau, A. K. (2012). The effects of positive interventions on happiness and
depressive symptoms, with an examination of personality as a moderator.
Journal of Happiness Studies, 14, 591–612.
Silvia, P. J. (2008). Appraisal components and emotion traits: Examining the
appraisal basis of trait curiosity. Cognition and Emotion, 22, 94–113.
Spielberger, C. D., & Starr, L. M. (1994). Curiosity and exploratory behavior. In H. F.
O’Neil, Jr. & M. Drillings (Eds.), Motivation: Theory and research (pp. 221–243).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Zuroff, D. C., Blatt, S. J., Sanislow, C. A., Bondi, C. M., & Pilkonis, P. A. (1999).
Vulnerability to depression: Reexamining state dependence and relative
stability. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 108, 76–89.
170 L.D. Kaczmarek et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 66 (2014) 165–170
