Content uploaded by Silvia H. Koller
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Silvia H. Koller on Jun 03, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
disponível em www.scielo.br/prc
663
From Authentic Happiness to Well-Being: The Flourishing
of Positive Psychology
Da Felicidade Autêntica ao Bem-Estar: A Psicologia Positiva em Florescimento
Fabio Scorsolini-Comin, a, Anne Marie Germaine Victorine Fontaineb,
Silvia Helena Kollerc & Manoel Antônio dos Santosd
aUniversidade Federal do Triângulo Mineiro, Uberaba, Minas Gerais, Brasil,
bUniversidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal,
cUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil
& dUniversidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brasil
Abstract
The present study aims to present paradigm shifts from the authentic happiness theory (2002) to the
well-being theory (2011), both developed in Positive Psychology by Martin Seligman. The well-being
theory adds fulfi llment and interpersonal relationships to the elements already included in the fi rst
theory (positive emotions, engagement and meaning), highlighting that well-being does not depend
only on individual aspects but on issues related to context and interpersonal relationships. Whereas
authentic happiness seeks life satisfaction, well-being aspires to fl ourishing – a more complex and
dynamic construct. Well-being theory opens the possibility of developing public policies related to
promotion of quality of life without ruling out the need for constant review of such approach.
Keywords: Happiness, well-being, health promotion, Positive Psychology.
Resumo
O objetivo do presente estudo é apresentar as mudanças paradigmáticas da teoria da felicidade
autêntica (2002) para a teoria do bem-estar (2011), ambas desenvolvidas na Psicologia Positiva por
Martin Seligman. A teoria do bem-estar acrescenta a realização e os relacionamentos interpessoais
aos elementos já incluídos na primeira teoria (emoções positivas, engajamento, sentido), destacando
que o bem-estar não dependeria apenas de aspectos individuais, mas de questões ligadas ao contexto
e relacionamentos interpessoais. Enquanto a felicidade autêntica buscava a satisfação com a vida, o
bem-estar almeja o fl orescimento, construto mais complexo e dinâmico. A teoria do bem-estar abre
possibilidade de que se desenvolvam políticas públicas relacionadas à promoção da qualidade de
vida, sem excluir a necessidade de constante revisão dessa abordagem.
Palavras-chave: Felicidade, bem-estar, promoção da saúde, Psicologia Positiva.
The Positive Psychology Perspective
Positive Psychology, considered one of the most recent
approaches in psychology, has been prominent since the
late 1990s. However, the term Positive Psychology was
fi rst referred by Maslow in 1954 in his studies regarding
motivation and personality (Snyder & Lopez, 2009).
At the end of the 1990s, Martin E. P. Seligman, in the
United States, legitimized the use of this term to denote
a theoretical approach proposed for the understanding of
the human being.
* Endereço para correspondência: Departamento de
Psicologia, Universidade Federal do Triângulo Mineiro,
Avenida Getúlio Guaritá, 159, 3º andar, Abadia, Uberaba,
MG, Brasil 38025-440. E-mail: scorsolini_usp@yahoo.
com.br, fontaine@fpce.up.pt, silvia.koller@gmail.com e
masantos@ffclrp.usp.br.
Apoio: CAPES, CNPq e Banco Santander.
According to Sheldon and King (2001), Positive
Psychology is the scientifi c study of the ordinary human
strengths and virtues. For Seligman (2000), Positive
Psychology is the study of feelings, emotions, institutions
and positive behaviors that have human happiness as their
fi nal goal. For Snyder and Lopez (2009, p. 17), “(Positive
Psychology) is the scientifi c and applied approach to un-
covering people’s strengths and promoting their positive
functioning”. Also according to these authors, the science
and practice of Positive Psychology are directed toward the
identifi cation and understanding of human qualities and
virtues, as well as promoting conditions for people to have
happier and more productive lives. From this perspective,
the meaning of happiness is not understood as something
fl eeting and fl uctuating but as a relatively permanent fee-
ling experienced over time.
Historically, it can be said that the movement known
as Positive Psychology was developed from the 1990s
Psicologia: Refl exão e Crítica, 26(4), 663-670.
664
by Martin Seligman, then the president of the Ameri-
can Psychological Association (APA), along with other
prominent researchers in the international arena, such
as Ken Sheldon, Barbara Fredrickson, Kevin Rathunde,
Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Robert Emmons, Carol Ryff
and Jon Haidt, among others. This perspective primarily
proposes modifying the focus of psychology, which shifts
from attempting to repair the “worst things” in life and the
emphasis on studies exclusively devoted to mental illness
to building positive qualities (Delle Fave, 2006; Snyder
& Lopez, 2009). This innovative proposal arises from the
observation that psychology, until then, leaned primarily
on the development defi cits, disorders, psychopatholo-
gies and mental illness. This effort to highlight health, as
opposed to illness, began to be stressed after the Second
World War with veterans who returned from battlefi elds
and needed to be reinserted into society and assisted in
their needs. By removing the focus from mental illness,
the possibility to highlight the positive aspects, strengths,
virtues and potential of the human being was opened,
focusing on health prevention and promotion.
According to Seligman (2002), Positive Psychology
is based on three main concepts, namely: the study of
positive emotion; the study of positive traits or qualities,
especially strengths and virtues, including such abilities
as intelligence and athleticism; and fi nally, the study of
the so-called positive institutions, such as democracy,
family and freedom, which support the manifestation of
virtues that, in turn, support the possibility of generating
positive emotions. Positive Psychology aims to highlight
the positive experiences, translated by positive emotions,
happiness, hope, joy; by individual positive characteristics,
character, strength, courage, virtue; and by positive insti-
tutions (Larrauri, 2006; Park & Peterson, 2007; Peterson
& Seligman, 2003; Seligman, 2002).
Considering the scientific production on Positive
Psychology in the Brazilian context, Paludo and Koller
(2007) indicate that there is still only scarce information
concerning this signifi cant change occurring in psycholo-
gy, with a gradual change being observed in the focus and
approach of the Brazilian studies on human development.
This scarcity of research may be due to the recent nature
of the studies in the area because this fi eld was offi cially
“born” in the late 1990s and early 2000s. As Positive
Psychology is a current that emerged in the United States,
its impact on the Brazilian scene is still slight compared to
European countries but has found fertile ground in Brazil
for the production of scientifi c knowledge, especially
starting in the year 2000 (Albuquerque & Tróccoli, 2004;
Camargo, Abadi, & Giacomoni, 2011; Giacomoni & Hutz,
2008; Lemos & Cavalcante, 2009; Paludo & Koller, 2007;
Paschoal & Tamayo, 2008; Passareli & Silva, 2007; Prati &
Koller, 2011; Rodrigues & Da Silva, 2010; Yunes, 2003).
In recent surveys (Scorsolini-Comin & Santos, 2009, 2010;
2011a, 2011b, 2012), it was noted that the Brazilian level
of research still contrasts with the abundance of European
and North-American studies (Barros, Martín, & Pinto,
2010; Delle Fave, 2006; Larrauri, 2006; Park & Peterson,
2007; Pérez, 2009; Peterson & Seligman, 2003; Seligman,
2002, 2004, 2011; Snyder & Lopez, 2009).
In Brazil, Calvetti, Muller and Nunes (2007) noted that
there is still not a work group at ANPEPP (Associação
Nacional de Pesquisa e Pós-graduação em Psicologia –
National Association for Research and Graduate Studies in
Psychology) dedicated to Positive Psychology, although a
meeting conducted in Florianópolis (SC) in 2006 and the
publishing of the book Resiliência e Psicologia Positiva
[Resilience and Positive Psychology] (Dell’Aglio, Koller,
& Yunes, 2006) can be highlighted as important milestones
of the movement in the national context. From the point
of view of measuring in the Positive Psychology fi eld,
related to aspects of subjective well-being and correlated
notions, such as fl ow, self, satisfaction and locus of control,
among others, the studies point to the need for production
of tools adapted and validated to the Brazilian context (Al-
buquerque & Tróccoli, 2004; Paschoal & Tamayo, 2008;
Scorsolini-Comin & Santos, 2010), preferably built from
national samples, which also does not exclude the need to
investigate the classical international tools, their assump-
tions, adaptation, transcultural validation and applicability
(Ferraz, Tavares, & Zilberman, 2007) in various situations,
populations and cultural contexts.
Considered to be a recent approach, Positive Psycho-
logy is developing rapidly, especially considering that its
propagation and discussion in academic circles date back
slightly over a decade. In addition to the constant develop-
ment of this perspective, the possibility of systematizing
the already consolidated production in the fi eld is opened to
gain knowledge on the gaps and potential for new studies.
It is in this direction that the theoretical foundations that un-
derlie Positive Psychology have advanced along this short
trajectory. The authentic happiness movement, formulated
in 2002, is currently being questioned, thereby allowing
the ascendance of the well-being movement, formulated
in 2011. Both movements were developed by Seligman
from several empirical studies with the participation of
researchers from all over the world. The transition from
a movement to another is automatic and exclusionary but
must be understood as an ongoing paradigm shift. Thus,
understanding this process is critical to align the Positive
Psychology goals to those of a psychological science
permanently committed to social change and the human
well-being.
Therefore, the objective of this study is to discuss the
paradigm changes from the authentic happiness movement
to the well-being one under the Positive Psychology pers-
pective. To this end, this study begins with a presentation
of the leading researcher on Positive Psychology, Martin
E. P. Seligman, seeking to identify how his biography
refl ected or allowed such changes.
665
Scorsolini-Comin, F., Fontaine, A. M. G. V., Koller, S. H. & Santos, M. A. (2013). From Authentic Happiness to Well-Being: The Flourishing
of Positive Psychology.
Seligman, the Researcher and his Work
From the 1990s, Martin E. P. Seligman became a re-
curring name in Psychology publications and conferences
worldwide. Before this period, Seligman was known for
his experimental research and in the psychopathology
fi eld. After more than 20 years since his initial thoughts
on Positive Psychology were presented to the scientifi c
community, his work has been increasing each year,
considering his investments not only in the dissemination
of Positive Psychology in academia or outside of it but in
transcultural studies that contributed to the improvement
of his concepts on human development.
Seligman was born in the United States in 1946, gra-
duated with a major in philosophy at Princeton University
(1964) and obtained a Ph.D. in psychology from the Uni-
versity of Pennsylvania (1967), where he currently teaches
in the psychology department. The main infl uence during
his training was Experimental Psychology followed by
extensive clinical practice. As a professor of psychopa-
thology, he once asked himself about the tendency of the
psychological science to focus their studies in diseases and
dysfunctional aspects, ignoring the positive aspects of de-
velopment. In 1997, when Seligman held the presidency of
the APA, his studies began to be disseminated worldwide.
The position held as the president of the largest psychology
entity conferred prestige and prominence to his research.
Positive Psychology, for Seligman (2011), must main-
tain its commitment to the human being, not allowing
itself to be confi ned to university walls but serving people
and their questions. This questions include the search for
health and well-being, as well as permanent accomplish-
ment, as announced in his work from 2004. Seligman has
published hundreds of scientifi c articles and has books
have been translated in several countries; he is considered
one of the best-known contemporary authors and one who
contributed the most to the construction of psychology in
the 21st century. One of the most recent and commonly
accepted ways to understand scientifi c productivity and
the consequent individual importance of researchers is the
h index measurement, developed by Hirsch (2005). In the
study by Buela-Casal, Olivas-Avila, Musi-Lechuga and
Zych (2011), the h indices of researchers that occupied
the presidency of APA since 1940 are presented and
discussed. In the ranking of these researchers, Seligman
occupies fourth place, therefore placing among the most
read and cited authors of the twentieth century. Seligman’s
h index is 41. It should be consid ered that these fi ndings
corroborate the testimonials that claim that his work is res-
pected and valued throughout the world, despite his being
the target of criticism, some of which has been received
and duly answered by the author (Seligman, 2011).
It should be considered that the movement dubbed Posi-
tive Psychology emerged from Seligman’s initiative along
other renowned researchers who have contributed for this
fi eld to improve and gain prestige in the scientifi c commu-
nity. Thus, we cannot highlight only the work of Seligman
as the epicenter of this discussion. Carol Ryff (1989), for
example, proposed a model of positive functioning based
on the concept of psychological well-being, encompassing
such dimensions as self-acceptance, personal growth, life
purpose, environmental domain and positive relationships
with others, which involve the ability to establish strong
empathy, affection and intimacy.
Another prominent researcher in the fi eld of Positive
Psychology is Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (1997), who de-
veloped studies on the fl ow state, which is considered one
of the most pervasive concepts in the area. The concept of
fl ow is defi ned as a state of optimal experience that people
express when they are intensely involved in what they
are doing. This state can be represented as a channel on a
scheme of challenge versus skill, separating the states of
boredom and anxiety: as the challenges increase, people
become more anxious, and when they decrease, they get
bored and fi nd it a dull experience. Thus, the fl ow state
may manifest when the challenge and ability are high and
in balance, which has subsidized the planning of interven-
tions in different professional and educational sectors. The
presence of fl ow depends on the combination of internal
and external conditions. In terms of external conditions,
we highlight the task characteristics, which should have
concrete goals such that people can adjust. Internally,
there are the personal characteristics, such as self-control
and ability of concentrated attention, which are strongly
associated to the fl ow states (Mesurado, 2009).
Regarding the positivity concept, we highlight the
studies by Alice Isen and Barbara Fredrickson. Isen (1987)
found that people who experience moderate positive emo-
tions tend to help others more, to be more fl exible in their
thoughts and to produce solutions for the problems. From
these considerations, Barbara Fredrickson (2009) develo-
ped a model capable of explaining the social and cognitive
effects of positive emotional experiences. According to
this author, the experience of joy expands the domain of
what a person wants to do at that moment, i.e., there is an
expansion of the momentary repertoire of thought-actions.
Observing a person who does something important and
inspires admiration can also enhance positive emotions
and change unfavorable pattern behaviors, as noted in
studies by Jon Haidt (2002). Witnessing a heroic act, for
example, leads the person to a state of elevation, which
raises the manifestation of positive emotions.
Ken Sheldon and his colleagues attempted to explain
human happiness from a model that integrates genetic
aspects, circumstantial and demographic determinants and
the process of intentional change. Although the genetic
component is of greater weight, the authors emphasize
intentional activity as a possibility of obtaining pleasu-
re, meaning and good health (Lyubomirsky, Sheldon,
& Schkade, 2005), which emphasizes the processes of
development as potentiators of the positive experience.
From the contributions of these different authors,
aimed at different objectives, it is emphasized that the
Positive Psychology proposal is a modifi cation from the
Psicologia: Refl exão e Crítica, 26(4), 663-670.
666
emphasis on repairing the worst aspects of life to building
positive qualities or virtues (Seligman, 2000; Snyder &
Lopez, 2009). Since its inception, Positive Psychology
has not been disseminated only in academia because it
develops interventions and proposals that also involve
non-academics, inviting them to benefi t from its practices.
An example of this growth is the International Association
of Positive Psychology (Associação Internacional de Psi-
cologia Positiva [AIPP]), which has over three thousand
members distributed in 70 countries, bringing together
not only researchers but also professionals of psychology
and several other fi elds, who are interested in the study
of well-being.
In 2005, Seligman and other researchers created
the fi rst academic program, Master of Applied Positive
Psychology from the University of Pennsylvania (MAPP).
This graduate program is directed to people who are alre-
ady engaged in the work market and are able to afford the
high tuition fees. Discussing themes such as coaching in
different sectors, as well as the importance of developing
the well-being in schools and universities, the program
was considered revolutionary precisely because it aims
to develop peoples’ transforming potential.
First Movement: Authentic Happiness
There are many existing theories to explain happiness.
There are those based in processes and activities, according
to which happiness is produced when we engage in certain
activities or work for a certain goal. Theories based on
genetic and personality dispositions suggest that happiness
may be a personality trait or characteristic more stable
than those of genetic origin. Finally, there are the theories
according which happiness lies in reducing stress through
the satisfaction of goals and needs (Snyder & Lopez, 2009).
Thus, the postulations discussed in this study do not seek
to solve this discussion or defend a single path but foster
it from contact with various Positive Psychology studies,
especially those by Seligman.
One of the fi rst concepts studied by Seligman (1991)
that contributed to the development of his notions on ha-
ppiness was that of learned optimism. In that publication,
the author recounts his journey through the studies about
learned helplessness and highlights several benefi ts of the
people considered optimistic as being more entrepreneurial
and having better health. Optimists tend to assume that the
problems experienced are temporary and due to external
causes, seeking solutions that do not place them as guilty or
as failures, and internalizing positive events. This ability to
prove optimistic in the face of events not always favorable
was considered one of the bases for Seligman’s theoretical
formulations, as we will see further on.
In 2004, the translation of the book Authentic Happi-
ness was published in Brazil, a book that has been origi-
nally published by Seligman in the United States in 2002.
Authentic happiness was the basis of Positive Psychology
in the early days of its creation and development. This
postulation recommends that happiness could be analyzed
according to three different elements: positive emotion, en-
gagement and meaning. Positive emotion consists of such
sensations as pleasure, excitement, ecstasy and comfort
among others. Engagement is related to a position of loss
of self, i.e., complete loss of self during the performance
of an activity considered pleasurable. Engagement refers
to a loss in which the person has little awareness of their
true sensations, only reports feeling much pleasure, being
in a position of constant openness. According to Seligman
(2004), all people can develop engagement in relation to
an activity and should identify what those activities are
and what features may favor the takeover of this position.
The third element is meaning, and it relates to the search
for purpose in life. A meaningful life consists of belonging
and serving something you believe is greater than the
self (Seligman, 2004). Humanity creates all the positive
institutions that provide consistency for this search, such
as religion, political parties, family, and the diverse social
groups.
To summarize, authentic happiness assumes that Po-
sitive Psychology relates with happiness in three aspects:
positive emotion, engagement and meaning. The measu-
rement of happiness could be conducted from measuring
tools that assess life satisfaction, the goal of Positive
Psychology being to increase the level of life satisfaction.
What strategies can contribute to increase satisfaction?
What interventions are most effective in achieving this
goal? What lifestyles promote this transformation? These
questions were initially raised in an intervention plan based
on authentic happiness. However, this position began to
be questioned by Seligman from the results of his research
throughout the fi rst decade of this century.
Seligman is not the only author to propose models that
lead people to the so-called happiness. Another important
author in the fi eld of Positive Psychology, Sonja Lyubo-
mirsky (2008), presents a scientifi c method for people to
achieve happiness, supported by exercises and strategies to
promote positive emotions, such as expressing gratitude,
cultivating optimism and positive social relationships,
manage stress and adversities, develop focus on the present
and commit to their goals. These characteristics should be
exercised through a training program aiming at real and
lasting happiness. Other studies were developed along
the same lines, such as the work by Daniel Kahneman on
hedonistic models of happiness.
Among the so-called defi ciencies of this fi rst Positive
Psychology movement, Seligman (2011) noted that au-
thentic happiness aims to redefi ne what happiness is in an
arbitrary way. As to engagement and meaning, the notions
are related to how the human being feel but are not part of
what is conceived as happiness. Another criticism refers
to the main measure of authentic happiness, which is the
level of life satisfaction. According to studies recovered by
Seligman (2011), mood could explain 70% of this index,
while judgment of subjects’ lives corresponds to 30%.
This perspective considers mood as the greatest predictor
667
Scorsolini-Comin, F., Fontaine, A. M. G. V., Koller, S. H. & Santos, M. A. (2013). From Authentic Happiness to Well-Being: The Flourishing
of Positive Psychology.
of happiness, which would lead to consider happiness as
something transient and situational. An introverted person,
for example, tends to be considered less happy than an
extroverted one, which would not take into account the
respondent perception or judgment about his emotions but
only his moods. Also according to Seligman (2011), life
satisfaction does not consider how much meaning there is
or how much people are committed to their work and how
much they engage with the people they love. As a possi-
ble measurement of mood, life satisfaction is extremely
variable and is therefore a situational measurement. Based
on these criticisms, Seligman and other researchers began
to review the construct of authentic happiness, developing
a second movement, known as well-being, which will be
described next.
Second Movement: Well-Being
It is with the purpose of initiating a “new Positive
Psychology” that Seligman (2011) starts his latest book. In
that work, he proposes a change in the Positive Psychology
goal: in 2004, it sought happiness. Currently, the term that
Seligman uses is well-being. This change in nomenclature
arose from several questions that emphasized happiness
as a complex concept to be operationalized in terms of
psychological construct. The term well-being, in contrast,
has greater acceptance in scientifi c circles and summarizes,
more appropriately, to what this referential proposes. Al-
though the term well-being is more palatable in comparison
with the concept of happiness, its discussion is not less
complex, given the existence of different dimensions of
well-being, such as psychological, emotional, subjective
and social, among other subdivisions (Snyder & Lopez,
2009). The adoption of these terms indicate different po-
sitions, comprising not only different factors promoters
of well-being but also plural visions about the concept, as
discussed in the studies by Ryff and Keyes (1995), which
hinders consensus among the scholars in the fi eld. The
demarcation of these concepts, however, is not the target
of Seligman’s discussions, which is the reason why they
will not be analyzed at this point.
When defi ning well-being, Seligman (2011) started
from the classic defi nition of health proposed by the
World Health Organization in 1946. To the absence of
illness, Seligman adds the presence of positive emotions,
leading to a situation of effective well-being. The author
uses several cases and research fi ndings on cardiovascular
illnesses, cancer and infectious diseases to propose that
exclusive focus on the disease does not always lead to a
cure and that negative emotions, such as pessimism, hate,
anger and depression, may be present in the etiopathogeny
of many diseases.
Thus, focusing on disease prevention and health pro-
motion, Seligman (2011) has listed several types of training
that could and should be developed as a way to protect the
population, leading to the adoption of a positive attitude
and directly linked to well-being. According to his studies,
optimists cultivate healthier attitudes, adopt healthier lifes-
tyles and believe that their attitudes are important, unlike
pessimists. Optimists also respond more adequately to me-
dical prescriptions. People with high levels of satisfaction
with life are more likely to watch what they eat, not smoke
and exercise regularly, also having more regular sleep.
Studies on positive health are still ongoing, raising many
questions but already pointing to the benefi cial effects of
the adoption of predominantly positive attitudes regarding
health conditions.
A new defi nition of Positive Psychology is proposed,
defi ning Positive Psychology as the science that investi-
gates well-being. According to this new proposition, well-
-being may be measured in relation to fi ve factors: positive
emotion, engagement, meaning, positive relationships and
accomplishment. Positive emotion continues to be the
main element in determining health, as well as authentic
happiness, but because they are considered subjective me-
asurements, happiness and life satisfaction become factors
relevant to the well-being theory, although they cannot
sustain well-being by themselves. Thus, the importance
attributed to positive emotion is reduced. According to
Seligman (2004), positive emotions can be related to past,
present or future events. Those emotions related to the futu-
re include optimism, faith and hope. Emotions that pertain
to the present encompass calm, plenitude, joy, ecstasy,
excitement and pleasure. Linked to the past are feelings
of satisfaction, contentment, accomplishment, pride and
serenity. These three types of positive emotions related to
time are not necessarily related to each other and can be
measured individually using specifi c scales.
In terms of past experiences, an aspect in which Po-
sitive Psychology distances itself from psychodynamic
traditions is when it states that the possible traumas or
negative experiences of childhood, for example, do not
necessarily lead to painful or distressing experiences in
adulthood (Seligman, 2004). Thus, the events considered
maladaptive in adulthood should be understood without
necessarily seeking explanations in the past, but bringing
up a series of present experiences focusing on the future,
to achieve well-being and permanent accomplishment.
In this second movement, engagement remains as an
element also evaluated subjectively, including such ques-
tions as “Have you had the feeling that time has stopped?”
and “Were you completely absorbed by the task?”. The
third element, meaning, is not considered just a subjective
state and is defi ned and measured independently from posi-
tive emotion or engagement. The element accomplishment
(also known as achievement) highlights that the Positive
Psychology goal is to describe, rather than prescribe, which
people effectively do to achieve well-being. The fi fth and
last element, positive relationships, emphasizes the need
for people to establish healthy relationships to achieve
well-being. Interpersonal relationships are considered
sources of support in anxiety moments and also as support
for sharing moments of ecstasy and joy. Research reco-
vered by Seligman (2011) noted that the loneliest people
Psicologia: Refl exão e Crítica, 26(4), 663-670.
668
tend to report lower levels of well-being, while those who
engage emotionally with others (in loving relationships,
friendship or camaraderie) tend to develop more adaptive
strategies to face situations considered diffi cult.
Well-being theory is plural in method as well as in
substance: positive emotion is a subjective variable,
defi ned by what you think and feel. Engagement,
meaning, relationships and accomplishment have both
subjective and objective components because you can
believe you have engagement, meaning, good relations
and high accomplishment and be wrong, even deluded.
The upshot of this is that well-being cannot exist just in
your head: it is a combination of feeling good as well
as actually having meaning, good relationships, and
accomplishment. The way we choose our course in life
is to maximize all fi ve of these elements. (Seligman,
2011, p. 36)
Thus, this second movement conceptualizes that the
goal of Positive Psychology is to increase fl ourishing, a
construct that encompasses the increase of positive emo-
tion, engagement, meaning, positive relationships and
accomplishment, involving an existence provided of a
greater meaning. The fl ow state was notably investigated
by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (1997) and involves the per-
ceived challenges or opportunities for action that expand
the existing personal skills. To increase the likelihood of
producing fl ow, this author has developed, for instance,
intervention programs that modify work environments.
Other studies, as reported by Delle Fave and Massimini
(1992), support the concept of fl ow as a state of optimal
involvement in which the person does not realize the
challenges of the action as an underutilization or burden
of his actual skills but has clear and reachable goals, as
well as immediate feedback on their progress (Snyder &
Lopez, 2009). As previously highlighted, the fl ow state can
be achieved or enhanced from high levels of challenges
and skills, which creates the possibility of understanding
this concept as a promoter of attitudes of greater personal
engagement in the resolution of problems, decreasing the
weight given to external factors and prioritizing personal
attitudes in the development of more suitable coping stra-
tegies and the capability of promoting signifi cant changes.
This change in purpose, by itself, indicates an im-
portant transition in Positive Psychology, broadening
the scope of this approach and enabling a more scientifi c
examination of well-being. The highly-desired fl ourishing
ceases to be a particular aspect and starts to be shared by
communities such that the pursuit of well-being can be
concrete, real and achievable. Obviously, further studies
on what fl ourishing is, in fact, must be conducted, as well
as on the effects of this concept on human development.
In Brazil, the discussion is still in a premature state with
only rare studies being conducted concerning the subject
of fl ourishing; therefore, the information available is still
fundamentally based on the fi ndings of the international
scientifi c community.
Final Considerations
To follow a decade of production in the fi eld of Po-
sitive Psychology, mainly marked by the publication of
two seminal works by Seligman, we observed several of
his trajectories and positions assumed in relation to con-
cepts concerning this approach. However, the choice of
this author and works does not refl ect the state-of-the-art
scientifi c production on Positive Psychology nor does it
aim to summarize the major advances in the fi eld, which
should be conducted from a closer dialogue with other
contemporary authors, who have also contributed to the
development of this fi eld of knowledge. By comparing
the two main movements highlighted by Seligman, one
could understand what changes occurred and what are
the possible repercussions of adopting these guidelines in
Positive Psychology studies, while the second movement
is still in its infancy.
As highlighted by Seligman (2011), authentic hap-
piness attests that people make choices estimating how
much happiness (satisfaction in life) they can achieve,
choosing the paths that maximize the satisfaction. This
maximization operation depends solely on the individual,
i.e., satisfaction is an individual measurement, regardless
of interactions and interpersonal relationships established.
This operation is the fi rst point where the well-being theory
shows advances, as it incorporates the need for social rela-
tionships for development and the feeling of being happy
and accomplished. In other words, social relationships
have greater importance, overtaking the consideration of
well-being as something solely individual. This point is
closely related to the fi ndings of many available studies,
including those conducted by Lee, Seccombe and Shehan
(1991) investigating married couples and by Diener and
Seligman (2003) examining young people considered
to be happy, to mention only two examples. Obviously,
such consideration includes the possibility of designing
intervention programs aiming at a collective well-being,
supported by public policies.
As well-being is not related only to the individual, its
promotion does not depend exclusively on the personal
sphere, emphasizing the need for other institutions and
decision-makers (government, political parties, public
policies) to contribute to promoting well-being. This
change in focus seems to herald the need for such institu-
tions to be increasingly called upon to participate in the
debate about well-being such that happiness is no longer
a solely personal construct and linked to self-knowledge.
These defi nitions are relevant guidelines to be developed
in future studies.
Another signifi cant change in the transition of these
movements is that in authentic happiness, the standard
of measurement is satisfaction with life, and its goal is to
increase it. As to well-being, the standard of measurement
is comprised of positive emotion, engagement, meaning,
positive relationships and accomplishment, and the goal
669
Scorsolini-Comin, F., Fontaine, A. M. G. V., Koller, S. H. & Santos, M. A. (2013). From Authentic Happiness to Well-Being: The Flourishing
of Positive Psychology.
is to increase fl ourishing through potentialization of the-
se elements. According to Seligman (2011), to fl ourish,
an individual must have all characteristics considered
essential (positive emotions, engagement, interest, mea-
ning and purpose) and at least three of the six additional
characteristics (self-esteem, optimism, resilience, vitality,
self-determination and positive relationships). Such cha-
racteristics can be developed and constantly improved
through training and specifi c interventions, which makes
well-being a construct that can be achieved and constan-
tly encouraged, as opposed to deterministic perspectives.
The long-term challenge is to create strategies such that
not only people but also institutions and countries can
fl ourish, improving the quality of life and well-being of all
to distribute the benefi ts of the joint effort more equally.
When drawing a parallel between these two move-
ments, it is noted that the second movement not only proves
to be more complex but also equates to a greater number
of elements that must be analyzed in the understanding of
what leads to well-being. The sense of accomplishment
and establishment of positive relationships are added to
the old tripod of authentic happiness, revealing the need
for a judgment that overtakes the personal or individual
dimension but considers the other(s) that is (are) in their
surroundings or is (are) part of their life. This new theore-
tical framework clearly should be investigated in greater
depth with the complex task of thinking about its possible
long-term repercussions in the Positive Psychology studies.
Although other theoretical postulations are in progress,
guided by other researchers in the fi eld, the scope of this
new movement brought by Seligman is considered relevant
and promising.
At the end of this study, it should be noted that we
brought a fi rst approximation between the two main theo-
retical Positive Psychology movements to date, which
does not invalidate other incursions by these theories or
even their revisions. Psychological science, as a body of
knowledge in constant expansion and characterized by
a marked theoretical-methodological dispersion, should
allow such paradigm transitions to offer new perspectives
on previously established approaches. It is in assuming
the dialogue between distinct perspectives – which, of
course, does not exclude the necessary theoretical clash
– that knowledge production can advance, proposing
renewed ways to learn, develop and assist human beings.
Considering that well-being can be produced and encoura-
ged raises the possibility of a less deterministic interpre-
tation of the psychological science, placing responsibility
on people, governments and institutions to constantly
promote well-being through fl ourishing.
References
Albuquerque, A. S., & Tróccoli, B. T. (2004). Desenvolvimento
de uma escala de bem-estar subjetivo [Development of a scale
of subjective well-being]. Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa,
20(2), 153-164.
Barros, R. M. A., Martín, J. I. G., & Pinto, J. F. V. C. (2010).
Investigação e prática em Psicologia Positiva [Research and
practice in Positive Psychology]. Psicologia: Ciência e Pro-
fi ssão, 30(2), 318-327.
Buela-Casal, G., Olivas-Avila, J. A., Musi-Lechuga, B., & Zych,
I. (2011). The h index of the presidents of the American
Psychological Association (APA) through journal articles in-
cluded in the Web of Science database. International Journal
of Clinical and Health Psychology, 11(1), 95-107.
Calvetti, P. U., Muller, M. C., & Nunes, M. L. T. (2007). Psico-
logia da Saúde e Psicologia Positiva: Perspectivas e desafi os
[Health Psychology and Positive Psychology: Perspectives
and challenges]. Psicologia: Ciência e Profi ssão, 27(4),
706-717.
Camargo, S. P. H., Abaid, J. L. W., & Giacomoni, C. H. (2011).
Do que eles precisam para serem felizes? A felicidade na
visão de adolescentes [What do they need to be happy?
The view of teenagers on happiness]. Revista Semestral da
Associação Brasileira de Psicologia Escolar e Educacional,
15(2), 241-250.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding fl ow. New York: Basic
Books.
Dell’Aglio, D. D., Koller, S. H., & Yunes, M. A. (2006). Resi-
liência e Psicologia Positiva: Interfaces do risco à proteção
[Resilience and Positive Psychology: The interfaces of the
risk protection]. São Paulo, SP: Casa do Psicólogo.
Delle Fave, A. (2006). Dimensions of well-being: Research and
intervention. Milan, Italy: FrancoAngeli.
Delle Fave, A., & Massimini, F. (1992). The experience sampling
method and the measurement of clinical change: A case of
anxiety disorder. In M. deVries (Ed.), The experience of psy-
chopathology (pp. 280-289). Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press.
Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2003). Very happy people.
Psychological Science, 13, 81-84.
Ferraz, R. B., Tavares, H., & Zilberman, M. L. (2007). Felicidade:
Uma revisão [Happiness: A review]. Revista de Psiquiatria
Clínica, 34(5), 234-242.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2009). Positividade: Descubra a força das
emoções positivas, supere a negatividade e viva plenamente
[Positivity: Discover the power of positive emotions, overcome
negativity and live fully] (P. Libânio, Trad.). Rio de Janeiro,
RJ: Rocco.
Giacomoni, C. H., & Hutz, C. S. (2008). Escala multidimensional
de satisfação de vida para crianças: Estudos de construção e
validação [Multidimensional scale of satisfaction in life for
children: Development and validation studies]. Estudos de
Psicologia (Campinas), 25(1), 25-35.
Haidt, J. (2002). The positive emotion of elevation. In C. R. Sny-
der & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), The handbook of Positive Psychology
(p. 753). New York: Oxford University Press.
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify and individual´s sci-
entifi c research output. Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences (PANAS), 102, 16569-16572.
Isen, A. M. (1987). Positive affect, cognitive processes, and so-
cial behavior. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,
20, 203-253.
Larrauri, B. G. (2006). Programa para mejorar el sentido del
humor: porque la vida con buen humor merece la pena
[Program to improve mood: Because life in a good mood is
worth-living]. Madrid, España: Pirámide.
Lee, G. R., Seccombe, K., & Shehan, C. L. (1991). Marital status
and personal happiness: An analysis of trend data. Journal of
Marriage and the Family, 53, 839-844.
Psicologia: Refl exão e Crítica, 26(4), 663-670.
670
Lemos, P. M., & Cavalcante, F. S., Junior. (2009). Psicologia de
orientação positiva: Uma proposta de intervenção no trabalho
com grupos em saúde mental [Positive orientation psychology:
A proposed intervention in mental health group work]. Ciência
& Saúde Coletiva, 14(1), 233-242.
Lyubomirsky, S. (2008). A ciência da felicidade: Como atingir
a felicidade real e duradoura [The how of happiness: A
scientifi c approach to getting the life you want] (M. Gama,
Trad.). Rio de Janeiro, RJ: Elsevier.
Lyubomirsky, S., Sheldon, K. M., & Schkade, D. (2005). Pursu-
ing happiness: The architecture of sustainable change. Review
of General Psychology, 9, 111-131.
Mesurado, B. (2009). Comparación de tres modelos teóricos
explicativos del constructo experiencia óptima: o flow
[Comparison of three theoretical models explicative of the
optimal experience construct: The fl ow]. Interdisciplinaria,
26(1), 121-137.
Paludo, S. S., & Koller, S. H. (2007). Psicologia Positiva: Uma
nova abordagem para antigas questões [Positive Psychology:
A new approach to old questions]. Paideia (Ribeirão Preto),
17(36), 9-20.
Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2007). Methodological issues in Positive
Psychology and the assessment of character strengths. In A.
D. Ong & M. H. M. Van Dulmen (Eds.), Oxford handbook
of methods in Positive Psychology (pp. 292-305). New York:
Oxford University Press.
Paschoal, T., & Tamayo, A. (2008). Construção e validação da
escala de bem-estar no trabalho [Construction and valida-
tion of the well-being scale at work]. Avaliação Psicológica,
7(1), 11-22.
Passareli, P. M., & Silva, J. A. (2007). Psicologia Positiva e
o estudo do bem-estar subjetivo [Positive Psychology and
the study of subjective well-being]. Estudos de Psicologia
(Campinas), 24(4), 513-517.
Pérez, C. L. (2009). Optimismo y salud positiva como predic-
tores de la adaptación a la vida universitaria [Optimism and
positive health as predictors of adaptation to academic life].
Acta Colombiana de Psicología, 12(1), 95-107.
Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2003). Positive organiza-
tional studies: Thirteen lessons from Positive Psychology. In
K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quin (Eds.), Positive
organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline
(pp. 14-27). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Prati, L. E., & Koller, S. H. (2011). Relacionamento conjugal e
transição para a coparentalidade: Perspectiva da Psicologia
Positiva [Marital relationship and transition to co-parenting:
Positive Psychology Perspective]. Psicologia Clínica, 23(1),
103-118.
Rodrigues, A., & Da Silva, J. A. (2010). O papel das caracterís-
ticas sociodemográfi cas na felicidade [The role of sociode-
mographic characteristics on happiness]. Psico-USF, 15(1),
113-123.
Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explora-
tions on the meanings of psychological well-being. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069-1081.
Ryff, C. D., & Keyes, C. L. M. (1995). The structure of psycho-
logical well-being revisited. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 69(4), 719-727.
Scorsolini-Comin, F., & Santos, M. A. (2009). A Psicologia Po-
sitiva no contexto brasileiro: História, presente e perspectivas
futuras [Positive Psychology in the Brazilian context: History,
present and future perspectives]. In S. N. Jesus, I. Leal, & M.
Rezende (Eds.), Experiências e intervenções em Psicologia da
Saúde [Experiences and interventions in Health Psychology]
(pp. 862-878). Faro, Portugal: Universidade do Algarve.
Scorsolini-Comin, F., & Santos, M. A. (2010). Psicologia Positiva
e os instrumentos de avaliação no contexto brasileiro [Positive
Psychology and evaluation tools in the Brazilian context].
Psicologia: Refl exão e Crítica, 23(3), 440-448.
Scorsolini-Comin, F., & Santos, M. A. (2011a). Casamento e
satisfação conjugal: Um olhar da Psicologia Positiva [Mar-
riage and marital satisfaction: A Positive Psychology view].
São Paulo, SP: Annablume.
Scorsolini-Comin, F., & Santos, M. A. (2011b). Relações entre
bem-estar subjetivo e satisfação conjugal na abordagem da
Psicologia Positiva [Relationships between subjective well-
-being and marital satisfaction under the Positive Psychology
approach]. Psicologia: Refl exão e Crítica, 24(4), 658-665.
Scorsolini-Comin, F., & Santos, M. A. (2012). Correlations be-
tween subjective well-being, dyadic adjustment and marital
satisfaction in Brazilian married people. The Spanish Journal
of Psychology, 15(1), 166-176.
Seligman, M. E. P. (1991). Learned optimism. New York: Knopf.
Seligman, M. E. P. (2000). Positive Psychology: An introduction.
American Psychologist Association, 55(1), 5-14.
Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Authentic happiness: Using the new
Positive Psychology to realize your potential for lasting fulfi ll-
ment. London: Nicholas Brealey.
Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Felicidade autêntica: Usando a
nova Psicologia Positiva para a realização permanente
[Authentic happiness: Using the new Positive Psychology
for permanent accomplishment] (N. Capelo, Trad.). Rio de
Janeiro, RJ: Objetiva.
Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Florescer: Uma nova compreensão
sobre a natureza da felicidade e do bem-estar [Flourishing: A
new understanding of the nature of happiness and well-being]
(C. P. Lopes, Trad.). Rio de Janeiro, RJ: Objetiva.
Sheldon, K. M., & King, L. (2001). Why Positive Psychology is
necessary. American Psychologist, 56, 216-217.
Snyder, C. R., & Lopez, S. J. (2009). Psicologia Positiva: Uma
abordagem científi ca e prática das qualidades humanas
[Positive Psychology: A scientifi c and practical exploration of
human strengths] (R. C. Costa, Trad.). São Paulo, SP: Artmed.
Yunes, M. A. M. (2003). Psicologia Positiva e resiliência: O foco
no indivíduo e na família [Positive Psychology and resilience:
The focus on the individual and family] [Número especial].
Psicologia em Estudo, 8, 75-84.
Recebido: 04/05/2012
1ª revisão: 09/10/2012
Aceite fi nal: 13/11/2012
