Updated thinking on positivity ratios

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  • 97 Citations

Abstract

This article presents my response to the article by Brown, Sokal, and Friedman (2013), which critically examined Losada's conceptual and mathematical work (as presented in Losada, 1999; Losada & Heaphy, 2004; and Fredrickson & Losada; 2005) and concluded that mathematical claims for a critical tipping point positivity ratio are unfounded. In the present article, I draw recent empirical evidence together to support the continued value of computing and seeking to elevate positivity ratios. I also underscore the necessity of modeling nonlinear effects of positivity ratios and, more generally, the value of systems science approaches within affective science and positive psychology. Even when scrubbed of Losada's now-questioned mathematical modeling, ample evidence continues to support the conclusion that, within bounds, higher positivity ratios are predictive of flourishing mental health and other beneficial outcomes.

LanguageEnglish (US)
Pages814-822
Number of pages9
JournalAmerican Psychologist
Volume68
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2013

Fingerprint

Mental Health
Psychology
Thinking
Positivity
Sokal
Mathematical Modeling
Empirical Evidence
Modeling
Flourishing
Affective
Positive Psychology

Keywords

  • Broaden-and-build theory
  • Lorenz system
  • Nonlinear dynamics
  • Positive psychology
  • Positivity ratio

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychology(all)

Cite this

Updated thinking on positivity ratios. / Fredrickson, Barbara L.

In: American Psychologist, Vol. 68, No. 9, 01.12.2013, p. 814-822.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{0be7ae7607af4390bb3aa3d0193a1583,
title = "Updated thinking on positivity ratios",
abstract = "This article presents my response to the article by Brown, Sokal, and Friedman (2013), which critically examined Losada's conceptual and mathematical work (as presented in Losada, 1999; Losada & Heaphy, 2004; and Fredrickson & Losada; 2005) and concluded that mathematical claims for a critical tipping point positivity ratio are unfounded. In the present article, I draw recent empirical evidence together to support the continued value of computing and seeking to elevate positivity ratios. I also underscore the necessity of modeling nonlinear effects of positivity ratios and, more generally, the value of systems science approaches within affective science and positive psychology. Even when scrubbed of Losada's now-questioned mathematical modeling, ample evidence continues to support the conclusion that, within bounds, higher positivity ratios are predictive of flourishing mental health and other beneficial outcomes.",
keywords = "Broaden-and-build theory, Lorenz system, Nonlinear dynamics, Positive psychology, Positivity ratio",
author = "Fredrickson, {Barbara L.}",
year = "2013",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1037/a0033584",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "68",
pages = "814--822",
journal = "American Psychologist",
issn = "0003-066X",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Updated thinking on positivity ratios

AU - Fredrickson,Barbara L.

PY - 2013/12/1

Y1 - 2013/12/1

N2 - This article presents my response to the article by Brown, Sokal, and Friedman (2013), which critically examined Losada's conceptual and mathematical work (as presented in Losada, 1999; Losada & Heaphy, 2004; and Fredrickson & Losada; 2005) and concluded that mathematical claims for a critical tipping point positivity ratio are unfounded. In the present article, I draw recent empirical evidence together to support the continued value of computing and seeking to elevate positivity ratios. I also underscore the necessity of modeling nonlinear effects of positivity ratios and, more generally, the value of systems science approaches within affective science and positive psychology. Even when scrubbed of Losada's now-questioned mathematical modeling, ample evidence continues to support the conclusion that, within bounds, higher positivity ratios are predictive of flourishing mental health and other beneficial outcomes.

AB - This article presents my response to the article by Brown, Sokal, and Friedman (2013), which critically examined Losada's conceptual and mathematical work (as presented in Losada, 1999; Losada & Heaphy, 2004; and Fredrickson & Losada; 2005) and concluded that mathematical claims for a critical tipping point positivity ratio are unfounded. In the present article, I draw recent empirical evidence together to support the continued value of computing and seeking to elevate positivity ratios. I also underscore the necessity of modeling nonlinear effects of positivity ratios and, more generally, the value of systems science approaches within affective science and positive psychology. Even when scrubbed of Losada's now-questioned mathematical modeling, ample evidence continues to support the conclusion that, within bounds, higher positivity ratios are predictive of flourishing mental health and other beneficial outcomes.

KW - Broaden-and-build theory

KW - Lorenz system

KW - Nonlinear dynamics

KW - Positive psychology

KW - Positivity ratio

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84890722435&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84890722435&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/a0033584

DO - 10.1037/a0033584

M3 - Article

VL - 68

SP - 814

EP - 822

JO - American Psychologist

T2 - American Psychologist

JF - American Psychologist

SN - 0003-066X

IS - 9

ER -