What Is Positive Psychology?
Introduction
Positive psychology explores how people, institutions, and communities thrive. It is based on the idea that simply not being ill does not guarantee well-being or a fulfilling life (Martin Seligman, 1998). While often called the science of happiness, it is really about understanding what makes life meaningful.
Martin Seligman used his 1998 presidential address to the American Psychological Association (APA) to suggest a change in psychology’s perspective and focus, which turned into a new movement called positive psychology. He argued that psychology (in general) tended to focus mainly on what is wrong with people (dysfunctions and disorders). Previously, some practices promoted human potential and excellence (like humanistic psychology). However, Seligman argued that positive human qualities like happiness did not attract much attention or credibility in mainstream psychology.
Positive psychology emerged to redress this void and soon became a fertile paradigm. It encompassed research into various qualities and characteristics deemed “positive,” including constructs such as love, hope and flourishing. Sure enough, none of these was radically new. Many of the topics discussed in positive psychology have been pondered for years by philosophers and scholars across various fields and debated for centuries, even millennia. However, part of the appeal of the positive psychology movement was the creation of a conceptual space in which these diverse topics, which shared the same outcome (i.e., well-being), could be assembled and considered collectively as an exclusive branch of science.
Several humanistic psychologists, most notably Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, and Erich Fromm, developed theories and practices related to human happiness and flourishing. Nonetheless, recent empirical support has emerged for those approaches, and scholars have advanced their ideas. Positive Psychology owes its success to the efforts and contributions of numerous pioneers (in addition to Martin Seligman), such as Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Christopher Peterson, Sonja Lyubomirsky, Barbara Fredrickson, Ed Diener, Paul Wong and many more scientists who have worked hard to bring people happiness and well-being.
Positive Psychology 2.0 (The Second Wave)
Initially, positive psychology offered an upbeat message, linking positive emotions to health and happiness, but this was problematic for various reasons. Firstly, it failed to appreciate the contextual complexity of emotional outcomes (Lazarus, 2003). For instance, excessive optimism can harm well-being (e.g., by contributing to risk ignorance), whereas pessimism may be beneficial (e.g., when it prompts safety or proactive coping). An even more significant concern was the suggestion (Held, 2002) that an emphasis on positivity contributed to a “tyranny of the positive”, i.e., a cultural expectation that one should always be upbeat. These criticisms led to what was described as the second wave of positive psychology (positive psychology 2.0).
The first wave’s focus was concentrated on the positive. In contrast, the second wave focused on well-being, which involves a subtle interplay between positive and negative phenomena. This recognition challenged the idea that well-being is synonymous with happiness; instead, it became a broader term that included negative emotions. More specifically, the second wave (positive psychology 2.0) supported four seemingly conflicting principles: appraisal, co-valence, complementarity and evolution.
The appraisal principle states that categorising emotional phenomena as positive or negative is challenging because such appraisals depend on context.
The second principle, covalence, suggests that phenomena comprise positive and negative elements. Valence (or hedonic tone is a scale that measures the pleasantness or unpleasantness of an event, experience, or emotion. It is the affective quality of emotions, i.e., being good (positive valence) or bad (negative valence). For example, to love is to become vulnerable. Love anyone or anything, and your heart will be pressed and possibly broken. Thus, while love contains pleasure, joy and bliss, it also harbours worry, anxiety and fear.
The third is complementarity. For example, the potential dysphoria (profound state of anxiety or frustration) inherent in love is not an abnormality but the very condition it complements. The light and the dark side of love are inseparable, complementary and co-creating sides of the same coin. Consider that the stronger and more intense the love is, the greater the risk of heartbreak.
Finally, the principle of evolution is reflected in the move away from a binary classification of emotions (positive and negative or good and bad) and toward a more nuanced appreciation of their complexities. This change is an evolution or advancement of positive psychology into a more complex and nuanced subject.
From a different perspective, the second wave of positive psychology (PP 2.0) involves bringing out the best in people and society, not despite but because of the dark side of human existence, through the dialectical (rational) principles of “yin and yang”. There has also been a distinct shift from focusing on individual happiness and success to the well-being of people within human societies. PP 2.0 pivots around the universal human capacity for meaning-seeking and meaning-making. It is more about bringing out the "better angels of our nature" than achieving optimal happiness or personal success because empathy, compassion, reason, justice, and self-transcendence will make people better humans and this world a better place to live in.
The second wave of the positive psychology movement (PP 2.0) was the inevitable and necessary response to the inherent problems of what has been called “positive psychology as usual” (the first wave). It has been argued that the initial binary (dichotomous) view of positive psychology has fuelled its original success and criticisms. The single-minded focus on positivity has resulted in persistent backlash and denunciations both within and outside the positive psychology community.
These condemnations included the so-called "tyranny of positivity,” a lack of balance between positives and negatives (covering the entire spectrum of human experiences), failing to fully recognise the importance of contextual variables, and assuming that Western individualistic culture represents the universal human experience.
As a result, various positive psychologists have proposed the need for a balanced perspective. For example, Paul Wong argued for integrating positive psychology with existential psychology, resulting in Existential Positive Psychology (EPP). This approach differs significantly from positive “psychology as usual" both in theory (epistemology) and content.
Paul Wong (2019) described the second wave of positive psychology as having two pillars: existential positive psychology (introduced by Paul Wong himself) and the original positive psychology (championed by Martin Seligman), which have four distinct principles.
Courageously accepting and confronting the reality that life is full of evil and suffering.
Realising that sustainable well-being can only be achieved by correctly dealing with suffering (the dark side of life).
Recognising that everything in life comes in different shades (or polarities - yin & yang) and the importance of achieving an adaptive balance in life.
Learning from philosophy (and ancient wisdom), psychology (in general), sociology and other sciences to find serenity and deep joy in all situations.
Other psychologists who led the second wave include Todd Kashdan, Robert Biswas-Diener, Itai Ivtzan, Tim Lomas, and Kate Hefferon.
Positive Psychology, The Third Wave
When Positive Psychology (PP) entered its third decade (2018), it also entered the third wave of its evolution. As Dr Tim Lomas (a lecturer in positive psychology at the University of East London) explained in an article in Psychology Today (2020), the wave metaphor is a helpful way to trace the patterns of development in positive psychology, as it represents a dynamic fluidity (continuity) with blurry, overlapping boundaries. Moreover, newer waves do not devalue or replace earlier ones since the preceding waves create the very conditions and energies for the next to emerge.
If "psychology as usual" was the thesis (focusing on fixing dysfunction) and first-wave positive psychology its antithesis (emphasising the positive), the second wave of positive psychology constituted a new synthesis (Lomas, 2020). Nonetheless, it continued to focus on the same meta-concepts underpinning the first wave, such as flourishing and well-being. However, it was characterised by a more nuanced contextual approach to the positive and negative. However, the second wave synthesised the first wave of positive psychology, but as it established itself, it became a new thesis awaiting a newer antithesis. In that respect, one can discern new movements on the horizon (Lomas, 2020).
The dominant feature of this third wave is various forms of epistemological broadening (knowledge- or cognitive-based) that go beyond the individual as the primary focus of enquiry. Take the label “positive psychology.” While the second wave questioned its first half (the positive), this third wave challenged its second part (psychology). Thus, we find emergent scholarship that goes beyond the boundaries of psychology to incorporate knowledge and methodologies from diverse fields and, in doing so, looks deeply at the groups, organisations, cultures, and systems in which people and their well-being are embedded.
Of course, there was an interest beyond individuals (groups and organisations), even in the first and second waves. However, the emphasis of research and practice remained primarily on the individual, perhaps reflecting the broader tradition of individualism in the Western cultures where positive psychology initially developed. However, the third wave sees a more active and comprehensive exploration of the systemic and socio-cultural complexities of people’s lived realities. This broadens the scope and processes of positive psychology in various ways, including in the following terms.
The focus of enquiry shifted beyond individual processes and phenomena, for instance, through emergent paradigms such as “systems-informed positive psychology” (groups, organisations, and societies).
Positive psychology was becoming multi-disciplinary and interdisciplinary, as reflected in hybrid formulations like "positive education."
Cultural contexts were becoming more global (multicultural), as reflected in Dr Lomas’ research exploring untranslatable words in non-English languages relating to well-being.
Positive psychology has embraced other paradigms (methodologies) and ways of knowing, such as qualitative and mixed methods approaches.
Some may argue that these ripples will not amount to a significant enough shift in the field to merit the label of a third wave. Nonetheless, given the energies that positive psychology has unleashed in academia, healthcare, and culture more broadly, new dynamics will likely continue to emerge. These will improve our understanding of well-being in ways we cannot yet even foresee (Lomas, 2020).
--------------------------------------------------
This year (2025) and beyond, positive psychology is expected to focus on understanding happiness and flourishing across different cultures (such as “Ubuntu” in African traditions “Ikigai” in Japanese culture), alongside continued advancements in applying positive psychology principles in various fields like education (supporting students’ learning, emotional development, and resilience), workplaces (employee engagement, productivity, and overall job satisfaction) and other social issues (healthcare, leadership, inequality, climate change, community building, promoting positive social change utilising data-driven insights to optimise well-being strategies), with a particular focus on integrating technology (apps, wearables and AI) to support positive interventions and personalised well-being practices.
The 38th World Summit on Positive Psychology, Happiness, Mindfulness, and Wellness (Positive Psychology, 2025) in Paris, France (23rd to 24th 2025) will likely shed more light on positive psychology’s future trajectory.
References and Further Reading
• Snyder, C. R., & Lopez, S. J. (Eds.). (2001). Handbook of positive psychology. Oxford University Press.
• Sheldon, K. M., & King, L. (2001). Why is positive psychology necessary? American psychologist, 56(3), 216.
• Seligman, M. E. (2002). Positive psychology, positive prevention, and positive therapy. Handbook of positive psychology, 2(2002), 3-12.
• Peterson, C. (2006). A primer in positive psychology. Oxford University Press.
• Wong, P. T. (2011). Positive psychology 2.0: Towards a balanced interactive model of the good life. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 52(2), 69.
• Kashdan, T. B., at Biswas-Diener, R. (2014). The Upside of your Dark Side- Why is being your whole self, not just your good self, driving success and fulfilment? Hudson Street.
• Seligman, M. E., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). Positive psychology: An introduction. In Flow and the Foundations of Positive Psychology (pp. 279-298). Springer, Dordrecht.
• Ivtzan, I., Lomas, T., Hefferon, K., & Worth, P. (2015). Second wave positive psychology: Embracing the dark side of life. London, UK: Routledge.
• Lomas, T., & Ivtzan, I. (2015). Second wave positive psychology: Exploring the positive-negative dialectics of wellbeing.
• Wong, P. T. P. (2015). What is second-wave positive psychology, and why is it necessary? Dr Paul T. P. Wong.
• Biswas-Diener, R. (2015). Should we trust positive psychology? Berkeley, CA: Greater Good Science Centre.
• Lomas, T., Waters, L., Williams, P., Oades, L.G., & Kern, M. L. (2020). Third wave positive psychology: Moving towards complexity. The Journal of Positive Psychology. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2020.1805501.
• Lomas, T. (2017). A meditation on boredom: Re-appraising its value through introspective phenomenology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 14(1), 1-22.
• Kern, M. L., Williams, P., Spong, C., Colla, R., Sharma, K., Downie, A., … & Oades, L. G. (2020). Systems-informed positive psychology. Journal of Positive Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2019.1639799.
• Lomas, T. (2020). Towards a cross-cultural lexical map of wellbeing. The Journal of Positive Psychology, doi: 10.1080/17439760.2020.1791944.
• Hefferon, K., Ashfield, A., Waters, L., & Synard, J. (2017). Understanding optimal human functioning – The ‘call for qual’ in exploring human flourishing and well-being. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12(3), 211-219. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2016.1225120
