The Psychology of Happiness: What Actually Makes Us Happy

The ancient Stoics believed happiness was a matter of perspective and acceptance. The Enlightenment placed it in rational self-interest and pleasure. Modern psychology discovered something less poetic but more actionable: happiness is roughly 50 percent inherited, 10 percent circumstantial, and 40 percent the result of intentional effort — a finding that explains why lottery winners return to their baseline mood and why poverty damages happiness in measurable but smaller ways than intuition suggests. Understanding how humans actually become and stay happy requires separating the durable from the temporary, the genetic from the chosen, and the hedonic from the meaningful.

What Happiness Actually Is

The ordinary language of "happiness" bundles together at least three distinct phenomena: momentary pleasure, satisfaction with life, and sense of purpose. Scientists have learned to separate them because they respond to different causes, involve different brain systems, and have different consequences for health and longevity.

Happiness — a complex psychological state encompassing three components: hedonic well-being (the experience of positive emotion and pleasure), life satisfaction (a cognitive evaluation of one's life as meeting important goals), and eudaimonic well-being (the sense that one's life is meaningful and aligned with core values).

The challenge in happiness research is that people use the word "happy" to describe any of these states, sometimes simultaneously. The person eating ice cream and laughing with friends is experiencing hedonic pleasure. The person reflecting that their life has turned out well despite challenges is experiencing life satisfaction. The person absorbed in meaningful work despite physical discomfort is experiencing eudaimonic well-being. One intervention can increase pleasure while decreasing meaning, or vice versa, making simple claims about "what makes us happy" misleading.

Psychologist Ed Diener, who pioneered the scientific study of subjective well-being, distinguished between affective components (how often you feel good versus bad) and cognitive components (your judgment about whether your life is going well). A person can feel bad most of the time — due to depression or chronic pain — while still believing their life is meaningful and worthwhile. The reverse is also possible: a person could feel mostly pleasant but judge their life as empty or wasted.

Source: Diener, E., Suh, E.M., Lucas, R.E. & Smith, H.L. (1999), "Subjective Well-Being: Three Decades of Progress," Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 276–302 — the foundational review of scientific happiness research, introducing the multidimensional framework for well-being.

The Hedonic-Eudaimonic Split: Two Different Paths

This distinction became critical when researchers began asking whether pursuing pleasure directly leads to happiness, or whether meaning leads to it instead. The hedonic path emphasizes maximizing positive feeling and minimizing negative feeling — the classical hedonism of ancient philosophy updated for modern life. The eudaimonic path, rooted in Aristotle's concept of eudaimonia, emphasizes living virtuously, developing abilities, and pursuing meaningful goals, even if doing so involves discomfort.

Hedonic well-being — subjective pleasure and life satisfaction derived from the direct pursuit and consumption of positive experiences, leisure, and comfort.

Eudaimonic well-being — a sense of purpose and fulfillment derived from developing one's potential, pursuing meaningful goals aligned with core values, and contributing to something beyond the self.

The research suggests both matter, but they are not interchangeable. A person pursuing purely hedonic goals — wealth for its own sake, status, physical appearance — shows weaker correlations with life satisfaction and mental health than someone pursuing eudaimonic goals like personal growth, relationships, or community contribution. Yet eudaimonia often requires discomfort: the meaningful work is hard, the relationships demand vulnerability, the growth requires failure and struggle. The person who experiences high eudaimonic well-being may report lower average pleasure but higher reported life satisfaction.

Studies of people across age groups, income levels, and cultures show that eudaimonic goals are more strongly tied to psychological well-being and life meaning, while hedonic goals are weakly correlated with these outcomes and more strongly correlated with anxiety and depression. Yet people persist in pursuing hedonic goals, partly because pleasure is immediate and psychologically intuitive.

Source: Ryan, R.M. & Deci, E.L. (2001), "On Happiness and Human Potentials: A Review of Research on Hedonic and Eudaimonic Well-Being," Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 141–166 — the systematic review distinguishing hedonic and eudaimonic well-being, with evidence for the greater durability of eudaimonic life satisfaction.

The Hedonic Treadmill: Why Progress Stops

One of the most robust findings in happiness research is the hedonic treadmill — the tendency for people to return to a baseline level of well-being even after significant positive or negative life events. You buy the car you have wanted for years, experience genuine happiness and excitement for weeks, and then notice the car has become background. You receive a promotion, enjoy the raise and status shift, and within months your aspiration ratchets up and the novel pleasure dissipates. On the flip side, you experience a serious loss, suffer genuine distress, and gradually recover toward your previous baseline — not immediately, but over months or years. This recovery rate varies with the type of loss (permanent disability produces longer-lasting changes than job loss), but the general pattern holds across most life domains.

Hedonic adaptation — the tendency of individuals to return to a baseline level of happiness despite major positive or negative changes in life circumstances, as the novel stimulus loses its emotional impact through repeated exposure.

The phenomenon is so pervasive that psychologists measure it by comparing happiness trajectories before and after major life events. Marriage produces a honeymoon period of elevated happiness, typically lasting 1-2 years, after which people return toward baseline — though married people tend to have a slightly higher baseline than they did before marriage. Large salary increases produce brief spikes in happiness; within a few years, the elevated income becomes the expected baseline and happiness equilibrates. Even severe disabilities that people initially fear will permanently diminish quality of life often produce smaller long-term effects on well-being than expected, as people adapt to the new circumstances and find meaning within constraints.

The treadmill explains why the pursuit of ever-greater pleasure or status produces a feeling of running in place. The payoff shrinks because the brain is optimized to detect change, not absolute state. A sunset is stunningly beautiful once per month; seen daily, it becomes pleasant background. A comfortable bed is a luxury if you have slept on cold floors; if you have always slept on a comfortable bed, it is normality, and it triggers no happiness spike.

Source: Brickman, P., Coates, D. & Janoff-Bulman, R. (1978), "Lottery Winners and Accident Victims: Is Happiness Relative?", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(8), 917–927 — the classic study of lottery winners and spinal cord injury patients showing return to baseline well-being despite life-altering events.

Source: Lucas, R.E. (2007), "Long-Term Disability Is Associated With Lasting Changes in Subjective Well-Being: Evidence From Two Nationally Representative Longitudinal Studies," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(4), 717–730 — the longitudinal study tracking adaptation to permanent disability.

Set-Point Theory and the 50-10-40 Model

In the 1990s and 2000s, researchers including Sonja Lyubomirsky began asking whether the hedonic treadmill is inevitable or whether some people escape it. The answer came in two forms: set-point theory and the now-famous "pie chart" of happiness.

Set-point theory — the hypothesis that each person has a genetically determined baseline level of happiness to which they tend to return, despite temporary fluctuations from positive or negative events.

Set-point theory was attractive because it explained individual differences: some people seem constitutionally upbeat, others more melancholic, and these dispositions appear stable across decades even after major life changes. Twin studies support the genetic component — identical twins raised apart show substantial correlation in self-reported happiness, suggesting a heritable baseline. But set-point theory also seemed to imply that efforts to increase happiness are futile, since you always return to your genetic baseline. This prompted Lyubomirsky to ask directly: can people escape the treadmill through sustained intentional effort?

Her research proposed a framework: happiness is determined by three factors. Approximately 50 percent is genetic — the set point. Approximately 10 percent is life circumstances — living in a rich country versus a poor one, being healthy versus chronically ill, married versus single. Surprisingly, circumstances matter less than intuition suggests. The remaining 40 percent is intentional activities — the things you do, think about, and value that you can control.

Factor	Approximate Contribution	Examples
Genetic set-point	50%	Personality traits, temperament, neurotransmitter baseline
Life circumstances	10%	Income (above poverty), marital status, health, location
Intentional activities	40%	Gratitude practices, social connection, meaningful goals, meditation, acts of kindness

The 40 percent figure is the actionable insight: while you cannot change your genes and while changing circumstances is hard, you have agency over the activities and mental habits that sustain well-being. Longitudinal studies testing this model found that people who engaged in gratitude practices, regular physical activity, acts of kindness, and goal-directed effort showed sustained increases in happiness beyond their apparent baselines.

Source: Lyubomirsky, S., Sheldon, K.M. & Schkade, D. (2005), "Pursuing Happiness: The Architecture of Sustainable Change," Review of General Psychology, 9(2), 111–131 — the foundational study proposing the 50-10-40 model and testing whether intentional activities can produce sustained changes in happiness.

Source: Lyubomirsky, S. & Layous, K. (2013), "How Emotions Shape Behavior: Even Enhancing the Ability to Recognize Emotions Improves Life Outcomes," Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22(6), 461–466 — meta-analytic summary of interventions and their effectiveness.

The Neuroscience of Happiness: Dopamine, Serotonin, and Oxytocin

Happiness is not a single neurochemical event but the combined activity of multiple systems. Three neurotransmitters and hormones are most central: dopamine, serotonin, and oxytocin.

Dopamine — a neurotransmitter involved in motivation, reward prediction, and the anticipation of positive outcomes; released not when you achieve a goal but when you encounter a cue predicting reward.

Dopamine is often called the "pleasure chemical," but this is misleading. The dopamine system fires most intensely in anticipation of reward, not during the reward itself. A person checking their phone repeatedly for a text from someone they like is experiencing dopamine release triggered by the possibility of good news, not the certainty of it. Dopamine systems evolved to motivate goal-directed behavior — to make you want things and pursue them — more than to produce pleasure during consumption. This explains why winning the lottery produces an initial spike followed by adaptation: the dopamine release came from the anticipation and the news, not from the money itself.

Serotonin, the other major neurotransmitter implicated in mood, is more involved in contentment and satisfaction. Serotonin is released when you have achieved something valued, when you feel socially connected, and when you are in a state of calm well-being. Low serotonin correlates with depression, and many antidepressants work by increasing serotonin availability. Unlike dopamine, serotonin is not primarily a motivation system; it is more a satisfaction system.

Oxytocin — a hormone and neurotransmitter associated with social bonding, trust, and the felt sense of connection to others; released during physical affection, social interaction, and cooperative behavior.

Oxytocin has received enormous popular attention as the "bonding hormone" or "love hormone," often with oversimplified claims about its effects. The research is more nuanced. Oxytocin is involved in the warm feeling of social connection and is elevated in people in close relationships, during physical touch, and during cooperative acts. Yet oxytocin also enhances in-group favoritism and intergroup anxiety, meaning it strengthens bonding within a group while potentially increasing wariness toward outsiders.

These three systems do not work in isolation. The person in a meaningful long-term relationship experiences the dopamine motivation system (wanting to spend time together), the serotonin satisfaction system (feeling content in the relationship), and the oxytocin system (feeling bonded and secure). The person who has achieved a meaningful goal experiences dopamine reward prediction in anticipation, serotonin satisfaction upon achievement, and potentially oxytocin if the achievement is social (sharing success with others).

Source: Schultz, W. (2016), "Dopamine, Pleasure, and Action: The Reward Prediction Error Signal," Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, 854, 17–32 — the review of dopamine's role in reward prediction, including evidence that dopamine fires in anticipation, not during consumption.

Source: Esch, T. & Stefano, G.B. (2010), "The Neurobiology of Pleasure, Reward Processes, Addiction, and Their Health Implications," Neuroendocrinology Letters, 31(2), 146–156 — the survey of serotonin, dopamine, and other systems in well-being.

Social Connection as the Strongest Predictor

The single largest finding in happiness research is that social connection predicts well-being more reliably than almost any other variable. The Harvard Adult Development Study, which followed individuals from adolescence into old age, found that people with strong relationships were happier, healthier, and lived longer than isolated individuals. The strength of the effect is large: the gap in life satisfaction between people with close relationships and those without is comparable to the gap between employed and unemployed individuals.

What counts as social connection is broader than romantic partnership, though partnership is one form. Close friendships, family relationships, community involvement, and even weak-tie acquaintanceships correlate with well-being. The relationship is bidirectional — happy people are more likely to maintain and form relationships, and close relationships produce happiness — but the causal arrow also points from relationships to well-being.

The mechanism is not fully understood, but the neurological and biological pathways are clear. Social interaction activates the oxytocin system, reduces stress hormones like cortisol, and appears to modulate immune function. Loneliness, by contrast, is associated with elevated inflammation, altered sleep architecture, and increased mortality risk comparable to smoking or obesity. The effect is not small or marginal; loneliness and social isolation are major public health concerns.

Notably, the quality of relationships matters more than the quantity. A person with three deeply meaningful relationships reports higher well-being than someone with dozens of superficial acquaintanceships. This has become more consequential in the age of social media, where it is possible to have hundreds of "connections" while feeling isolated. Online interaction can supplement in-person relationships but does not replace them in terms of happiness impact.

Source: Waldinger, R.J. & Schulz, M.S. (2016), "The Long Reach of Neglected Childhood: A Longitudinal Study of Hazardous Drinking in Midlife," Pediatrics, 137(5), e20153432 — the Harvard Adult Development Study findings on relationships and well-being across the lifespan.

Source: Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T.B. & Layton, J.B. (2010), "Social Relationships and Mortality Risk: A Meta-Analytic Review," PLoS Medicine, 7(7), e1000316 — the meta-analysis showing that social connection predicts longevity as strongly as major health risk factors.

Money and Happiness: The Satiation Point

Money and happiness have a well-documented relationship: poverty is damaging to well-being, but beyond a certain income threshold, the relationship weakens substantially. The relationship is logarithmic rather than linear: the difference in happiness between having no money and having enough for food and shelter is enormous. The difference between having enough for comfort and having extraordinary wealth is much smaller.

Psychological research suggests that money produces happiness when it is used to buy time (hiring help to reduce drudgery), experiences (travel, activities with others), and the capacity to help others. Money does not reliably produce happiness when used to buy status goods, larger quantities of the same product, or things designed to impress others. This distinction matters because the same income can produce very different outcomes depending on how it is spent.

The satiation point — the income level beyond which additional money produces minimal happiness gains — appears to be around 75,000 USD annually in developed countries, though it varies with local cost of living. Below that point, happiness correlates fairly strongly with income. Above it, the correlation drops dramatically. This is not because rich people are unhappy; it is that additional wealth produces negligible additional happiness, while the hedonic treadmill means that a higher income becomes the expected baseline.

Notably, people systematically underestimate adaptation to material goods. Before buying a luxury item, people believe it will produce lasting happiness; after purchase, adaptation is faster than expected. This creates a "happiness gap" between anticipated and experienced well-being from material consumption.

Source: Kahneman, D., Krueger, A.B., Schkade, D.A., Schwarz, N. & Stone, A.A. (2006), "Would You Be Happier If You Were Richer? A Focusing Illusion," Science, 312(5782), 1908–1910 — the study of money and life satisfaction, identifying the satiation point and adaptation effects.

Source: Dunn, E.W., Gilbert, D.T. & Wilson, T.D. (2011), "If Money Doesn't Make You Happy, Then You Probably Aren't Spending It Right," Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(2), 115–125 — the review of how to spend money to maximize happiness: experiences, time-saving, and helping others.

Flow States and the Experience of Meaning

One of the most reliable routes to eudaimonic well-being is flow — the state of complete absorption in a challenging task that matches your skill level. The concept was developed by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, who studied people engaged in activities they found intrinsically rewarding: artists painting, chess players competing, rock climbers ascending.

Flow — a psychological state of complete concentration and engagement in an activity where challenge and skill are in balance, time seems to disappear, and the activity is pursued for its own sake rather than external reward.

Flow states are characterized by several markers: the activity demands skill that matches the person's ability (not so easy that it is boring, not so hard that it is frustrating), there is clear feedback about performance, the person has a sense of control, and the activity has intrinsic rather than extrinsic motivation. In flow, self-consciousness disappears, the sense of time distorts, and the experience is deeply rewarding even if it involves physical or mental strain.

Crucially, flow produces well-being in two ways. In the moment, during the activity, people experience intense engagement and positive emotion. But flow also produces lasting well-being because engagement in meaningful activity is itself satisfying in the eudaimonic sense. A person who spends time in flow states — whether through work, hobbies, creative pursuits, or sports — reports higher life satisfaction than someone avoiding challenge and friction.

The relevance to happiness is that many of the conditions for flow — having meaningful work, developing skills, pursuing intrinsically motivated goals — are among the strongest predictors of sustained well-being. A job that pays well but offers no challenge or meaning produces less happiness than a job that is moderately paid but offers both challenge and purpose.

Source: Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990), Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, Harper & Row — the foundational work on flow states and their role in human flourishing and well-being.

Source: Heutte, J., Fenouillet, F., Kaplan, A., Martin-Krumm, C.P. & Bachelet, R. (2014), "The Power of Collective Flow in the Initiation of Adolescent Generativity," Psychological Well-Being, 4, 3 — the study of flow and its relationship to eudaimonic well-being and meaning.

Gratitude and the Practice of Noticing Good

One of the most empirically supported happiness interventions is the practice of gratitude — deliberately noticing and reflecting on things for which one feels thankful. Dozens of randomized controlled trials have found that people who engage in regular gratitude practices (writing down things they are grateful for, telling someone they appreciate them, or reflecting on benefits received) show increases in positive emotion, life satisfaction, and well-being.

The effect size is modest but meaningful, typically in the small-to-medium range, and it persists over time. Gratitude practices seem to work partly through a direct shift in attention — training the mind to notice the good and positive rather than focusing on deficits and problems — and partly through a reframing of life narrative. A person reflecting on things to be grateful for is implicitly asking, "What is good about my life?" rather than "What is wrong with it?" This is not mere positive thinking or denial; gratitude practices do not reduce awareness of genuine problems. Rather, they add a second spotlight to the mind's attention, illuminating both the difficulties and the goods that coexist.

The practices show greater benefit when they are specific and focused. Listing ten things you are grateful for once has weaker effects than listing a few genuine gratitudes with real felt appreciation, or varying the gratitude objects (family one day, work the next) so that adaptation does not diminish the effect. This connects back to hedonic adaptation: if you practice gratitude for the same things repeatedly, the warm feeling fades as those items become habitual. Variety sustains the emotional benefit.

Source: 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(2), 377–389 — the seminal study of gratitude interventions and their effects on well-being.

Source: Sheldon, K.M. & Lyubomirsky, S. (2006), "How to Increase and Sustain Positive Emotion: The Effects of Expressing Gratitude and Visualizing Best Possible Selves," Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(2), 73–82 — the study of variety in gratitude practices and its effects on hedonic adaptation.

Positive Psychology and the PERMA Model

Positive psychology is the field of psychology focused on understanding and cultivating human flourishing rather than exclusively diagnosing and treating dysfunction. The founder, Martin Seligman, has proposed several models of well-being, the most influential being the PERMA model, which identifies five pillars of flourishing.

PERMA — a model of well-being comprising five elements: Positive Emotion (the hedonic component of happiness), Engagement (flow and absorption in activities), Relationships (social connection and belonging), Meaning (sense of purpose and contribution to something larger), and Accomplishment (mastery and achievement of valued goals).

Positive emotion is what many people mean by "happiness," but Seligman argues it is only one component. A life with positive emotion but without relationships, meaning, or accomplishment is not truly flourishing. Engagement captures the flow state and the intrinsic reward of meaningful activity. Relationships tap the social connection finding. Meaning is eudaimonic — the sense that your life matters and contributes to something beyond yourself. Accomplishment is the sense of progress and mastery in domains you care about.

The PERMA framework is not only descriptive but prescriptive: if you want to increase well-being, you should cultivate all five elements. A person might increase positive emotion through pleasure-seeking but damage meaning by neglecting purposeful work. Or they might pursue meaning through a demanding career while neglecting relationships. Sustainable flourishing requires attention to all five.

The research on the-psychology-of-habits shows that these elements are not static traits but can be cultivated through habitual action. Building stronger relationships is a practice. Engaging in meaningful work or volunteer service is a choice. Pursuing accomplishment in domains you care about is intentional. This connects back to Lyubomirsky's 40 percent: these practices are within your agency.

Source: Seligman, M.E.P. (2011), Flourish: A Visionary New Understanding of Happiness and Well-Being, Free Press — the articulation of the PERMA model and positive psychology's approach to human flourishing.

Source: Butler, J. & Kern, M.L. (2016), "The PERMA-Profiler: A Brief Multidimensional Measure of Flourishing," International Journal of Wellbeing, 6(2), 1–48 — the development of a measurement instrument for the PERMA model.

Stress, Motivation, and the Drawback of Excessive Positivity

An important caveat in happiness research is that the pursuit of happiness can backfire if it becomes a demand or a source of guilt. People who set an implicit goal of always feeling good, or who judge themselves harshly for experiencing negative emotion, often show worse mental health outcomes than those who accept a full range of emotions. This is the "dark side" of positive psychology: if pursued as a rigid mandate rather than a flexible direction, it can increase distress.

Additionally, moderate amounts of negative emotion and stress are functional. The stress response evolved to handle threats and challenges. Some stress is necessary for growth, learning, and accomplishment. A person experiencing no stress and no challenge may feel pleasant but not engaged or accomplished. The goal is not to eliminate negative emotion but to balance challenge and support, meaning and ease.

Relatedly, some degree of rumination and reflection about difficulties is necessary for learning and psychological growth. The goal is not to suppress negative thought but to distinguish between ruminative spiraling (unhelpful repetition of worry and self-blame) and constructive reflection (thinking through a problem to understand it and plan a response). Happiness interventions should support the latter without eliminating the former.

Source: Gruber, J., Mauss, I.B. & Tamir, M. (2011), "A Dark Side of Happiness? How, When, and Why Happiness Is Not Always Good," Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(3), 222–233 — the review of the costs and drawbacks of excessive pursuit of happiness and positivity.

The Takeaway

Happiness is not a destination but a byproduct of how you live. The research shows that genetics set a baseline, and circumstances matter less than people expect. What matters most is what you do: the relationships you invest in, the meaningful work or pursuits you engage in, the small practices of gratitude and kindness, the willingness to challenge yourself and grow. The hedonic treadmill means that pleasures fade, but it also means that you can return to baseline even after loss. The 40 percent of well-being within your control is large enough to matter and small enough to be realistic. You will not become perpetually ecstatic through effort, but you can shift your baseline upward through practices that have been tested and found to work. The happiness you experience tomorrow is partly determined by your genes and circumstances, but a meaningful portion is determined by what you choose to attend to and do today.

---

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Can someone be happy while experiencing grief or loss?
A: Yes. Life satisfaction and eudaimonic meaning can coexist with sadness and loss. The hedonic component of happiness (positive emotion) may be low during grief, but a person can still experience meaning in relationships with the deceased, purpose in how they carry on, and connection to others who understand their loss. Happiness and sadness are not opposites — they are independent dimensions.

Q: Is it selfish to focus on your own happiness?
A: Not if happiness is pursued through connection to others and contribution to something beyond yourself. The research shows that the most durable happiness comes from meaningful relationships and purposeful action, both of which involve other people. Selfish pursuit of pleasure (hedonic goods pursued exclusively for personal comfort) is actually less effective at producing happiness than altruistic or relational pursuits.

Q: Does happiness require a specific personality type?
A: No. While genetic disposition influences baseline well-being, people of all personality types report high life satisfaction. Introverts and extroverts, optimists and realists, ambitious and content individuals can all flourish — the pathways differ but the outcome is possible. An introvert may find happiness in deep friendships and solitary meaningful work; an extrovert in large social networks and collaborative projects.

Q: How long does it take for happiness interventions to work?
A: Most studies show measurable changes within weeks, though the effect builds over time. Gratitude practices show benefits within 1-2 weeks of consistent practice. Physical activity produces mood benefits within days. Social connection effects are visible within days and weeks. The key is consistency; sporadic practice produces weaker effects than regular engagement.

Q: Can you pursue meaning without sacrificing enjoyment?
A: Yes. Eudaimonic and hedonic well-being are related but independent. A meaningful life can also include pleasure — good food with friends, beautiful experiences, comfort and ease. The research suggests that pursuing meaning is not opposed to pleasure but often produces both. Meaningful work is more satisfying than meaningless work, even if the meaningful work is harder.

Q: What is the relationship between happiness and mental health?
A: Happiness and mental health are related but distinct. You can experience mental health (absence of severe distress or dysfunction) without high happiness, and conversely, happiness does not guarantee resilience in the face of major life stress. Treatment of depression or anxiety often improves happiness but is not identical to it. A person can have good mental health (functional, coping) and moderate happiness; or suffer mental illness (depression, anxiety) and still experience moments of meaning and connection.

---

Read next:

• The Science of Motivation
• The Psychology of Stress
• Why We Feel Emotions: The Science of Feeling