# Motivation and emotion/Book/2024/Subjective wellbeing heritability and changeability

* Multimedia presentation (3 min)

## Overview

* Case scenario
* Figure 1: Emily sitting in her room reminiscing and flicking through old photos of her and her family
* Emily sits by herself in her room, flicking through pages on her family’s old photo album.
* As she looks through old photos of herself with family and friends, she can’t help but notice how much happier she used to be - laughing and smiling with friends and family at different social events. However, recently, despite being in a supportive and consistently positive environment, Emily feels overwhelmed by a sense of anxiety and unease. To try and combat these negative feelings, Emily begins filling in her spare time with activities she's passionate about or enjoys. However, no matter how much she tries, her negative emotional state and feelings always seem one step ahead.
For centuries, psychology has sought to understand why and how happiness varies in some cases, like Emily's (see Case scenario). Why in some cases, despite external and objective success, negative feelings and emotions are still overwhelmingly persistent[grammar?]. Is it possible subjective well-being (SWB) is rather caused by or at the hands of something bigger than environmental influences - something such as genetics? Or can SWB be shaped and intentionally manipulated through certain actions and explicit behaviours?
In recent years, studies have expanded upon the foundations of initial wellbeing research and understandings to better investigate the relationship, or lack thereof, between SWB and genetics. To provide a better understanding of the current discussion, this chapter explores the complex interplay and specific dynamic shared between these two aspects of psychological research. This chapter provides a comprehensive understanding of this question: To what extent is SWB heritable or changeable?
To better facilitate learning endeavours throughout the chapter and a general understanding of the topic at hand, this question has been broken down into a series of focus questions. By the end of the chapter, thorough understanding should be developed regarding the main question and the focus questions:
* Focus questions
* What do the terms 'SWB', 'heritability', and 'changeability' mean?
* What are the relevant research origins of SWB that contribute to understanding the extent of changeability and heritability?
* What theoretical underpinnings provide assistance in understanding SWB changeability and heritability?

## Introduction

In [which?] recent decades, the biological study of heritability has converged with that of psychological research on SWB. The intersection of these two fields has sparked much interest into answering fundamental question of how much or to what extent is SWB genetically predetermined or changeable. Resultantly[awkward expression?], a number of underlying assumptions must be considered first before seeking to answer the question. First, this question assumes that, in more ways than none, SWB is both genetically rooted and malleable at the hands of environmental influences. In spite of SWB's genetic grounds, the second assumption posits that significant environmental factors have the capacity to override genetic predispositions and alter the course of SWB outcomes. These assumptions lay out the specific perspectives and underlying ideas of this question.

### SWB

According to Bartels (2015), the individual term 'well-being' is used to refer to and convey 'information regarding a broad range of behaviours' (p.138 ). This definition lays the basis for additional, context-specific definitions of well-being, where the meaning is applied to across research fields, to give to terms such as SWB. SWB is an umbrella term, used to discuss the differences in how quality of life is internally processed, evaluated and generally perceived (Dolan et al., 2008). This particular aspect of well-being is studied most frequently in psychological research, with a fair amount of studies cross-examining SWB with overlapping concepts and relevant theories (Bartels, 2015). Across these bodies of research, SWB is often broken down even further into the dimensions shown in Table 1.

#### Three dimensions of SWB

[Provide more detail]
Table 1. [Add table caption]
| Dimension | Definition |
| Life Satisfaction (LS) | Evaluation of one's life as a whole rather than specific aspects of such. Largely guided by an overall judgement about one's life compared against a personal perception of what suggests a 'good' life (Kozma, Stone and Stones, 2000) Factors considered: Personal relationships, financial stability, socioeconomic status, work-related fulfilment, etc. |
| Positive Affect (PA) | Similar to the focus of emotional well-being, PA relates to the presence and experience of positive emotions. (Kozma, Stone and Stones, 2000). Examples: happiness, joy, excitement, etc. |
| Negative Affect (NA) | Conversely to PA, NA focuses on the frequency and experiences of negative emotions within and in relation to the perceived quality of one's life (Kozma, Stone and Stones, 2000). Examples: sadness, anger, frustration, fear, etc. |
These three dimensions provide the basis for how SWB is understood and examined across contexts.

### Heritability

According to the National Cancer Institute (2024), 'heritability' refers to the 'proportion of variation in a population trait that can be attributed to inherited genetic factors (p. 1). Derived from the studies of human and species evolution, heritability tests are often used in biological research to uncover and understand how genes and genetic variance contribute to different outcomes and expressions of certain traits (see Figure 2). To investigate the concept of heritability, scientists examine trait variance between twins, and adopted children and their biological and adopted parents.
Quiz
These exercises are designed to quiz you on your learning throughout the chapter, thus far. You are allowed infinite attempts to take the quiz, however to facilitate the best understanding of the content, read through the relevant sections related to each question to find the correct answer(s). Good luck!
What is meant by the term 'SWB'
Subjective Well-being: an umbrella term used to discuss the differences in how quality of life is internally processed, evaluated and generally perceived
Sentimental Well-being: a term that refers to the well-being of memory recall capacity
Surrogate Well-being: a term that refers to the well-being of surrogate mothers during pregnancy
What are the three dimensions of SWB?
Happiness, Satisfaction, and Heritability
Mind, Body, and Soul
Life Satisfaction, Negative Affect, and Positive Affect
Psychological, Physical, and Financial :

## Research origins of SWB heritability

[Provide more detail]

### Well-being

Studies that examines[grammar?] the potential link between SWB and heritability are largely rooted in early genetic and well-being research. While well-being research was not a significant focus until the end of the 1950s, its theoretical roots span back as far as the late 1910s through to the 1930s (Nes & Roysamb, 2015). During this period, much of the psychological research focus was directed towards understanding mental health and related determinants of mental illness (Nes & Roysamb, 2015). In 1917, Abraham Myerson's (see Figure 3) paper on mental hygiene was one of the first studies to provide a great deal of insight and emphasis on the crucial role of well-being in the study of mental health (Nes & Roysamb, 2015). Following this, psychological research did not expand its focus beyond mental health studies, with the few studies that examined well-being only being concerned with its ties to mental health complications (Angner, 2011). Not until the later half of the 20th century, did psychological studies go on to examine more nuanced definitions of well-being, conceptualising new frameworks like SWB. However, this breadth of research in the early 1900s established key concepts relevant for understanding SWB, such as life-satisfaction, self-realisation, and more (Angner, 2011). These studies would go on to provide SWB research with the fundamental frameworks that support today's understandings and research. With the foundational work of psychologists and authors like Diener (1984) and Veenhoven (1984), SWB studies began working towards and developing key theoretical underpinnings relevant to understanding this specific aspect of well-being. Within these endeavours, research saw validity from external fields, like biology and sociology, and borrowed relevant concepts and theories to assist in untangling the mysteries of SWB (Angner, 2011).

### Genetic research

Genetic research predates well-being research, with some of its earliest work spanning back to as early as the 17th century. However, while these studies paved the way for greater developments in biological research across later periods of social revolution, much of the methods and findings are perceived as barbaric according to today's standards. Up until the late 19th and early 20th century, genetic research was still very ill-informed of genetic mechanisms of the human body. However, with contributions from biologists like Gregor Mendel in the early 1900s, genetic, and even moreso, heritability research developed and progressed significantly (Nes & Roysamb, 2015). These contributions utilised twin- and adoption-studies (see figure 4) to disentangle the complex mechanisms of genetic inheritance.
Such studies allowed biologists to examine and understand how both genetic determinants and environmental influencers contribute to characteristic variance. Despite significant contributions from well renowned scientists like Francis Galton, the validity of these assessments were significantly undermined by ill-structured understandings of genetics. For instance, much of these studies were still yet to uncover the difference between identical and fraternal twins, creating a large disconnect between the findings and the reality of genetic heritability. However, as research entered the later half of the 20th century, scientists sought to redefine much of the theoretical and fundamental understandings employed in relevant research to achieve better, and more reliable findings. These endeavours in the 1970s and onwards provided much of the foundations and theoretical frameworks used in today's biological research. During this period of research progression, scientists began drawing links between key theories and concepts of other studies, especially psychology and sociology (Nes & Roysamb, 2015).

### Convergence of genetic and psychological research

[Provide more detail]

#### Research across the 1900s

In the mid-late 1900s, scientists expanded and applied biology studies on gene-heritability to the understanding of SWB mechanisms and determinants. These endeavours were tasked with disentangling and better understanding the potential contributions of both environmental and genetic factors on SWB. First applications of genetic research began during across the 1970s and 1980s, with behavioural genetics integrating the focus of SWB into pre-existing studies, such as twin studies (Bartels & Boomsma, 2009; Nes & Roysamb, 2015). Key bodies of research, such as that of Tellegen et al. (1988) and Eaves et al. (1989) provided valuable insight to understanding the genetic basis of SWB, demonstrating how environmental factors influence SWB outcomes alongside genetic determinants. In spite of this, researchers like Turkheimer and Gottesman (1991), maintained their biological perspectives, supporting the notion that behavioural traits of humans are entirely heritable and uninfluenced by environmental factors. With these key bodies of work, amongst other foundational studies, psychological research had laid out and established a well-rounded understanding of the potential relationship between SWB outcomes and both genetic and environmental influencers.

#### Research across the 2000s: A new age

Of the numerous studies published in the early 2000s, only a small portion of research examined and built upon the contentions of previous research regarding SWB heritability and changeability. With significant social progression characterising the early 2000s, studies began considering certain social factors within environmental determinants, such as socioeconomic status, life circumstances and social relationships. With this, studies like Diener and Seligman's (2004) expanded on this perspective, emphasising that while genetics do contribute to SWB outcomes, their effect on SWB is compounded and altered significantly by environmental factors and determinants.
As research endeavours continued throughout the early 2000s and into the late 2010s, advancements in research techniques facilitated deeper and better quality investigations of SWB heritability (see figure 5). For instance, Baselmans et al.'s (2019) study examined the influence of specific genotypes and phenotypes on SWB across twins and participants from twin studies. Baselmans's (2019) study was among a large body of research pertaining to the 2010s that examined the specific relationship between certain genes and environmental compounding factors on SWB outcomes. Currently, studies continue to grow and expand upon more nuanced aspects of SWB or applications of such to different contexts (e.g., cultures, organisational contexts, industries, science based research topics, etc.).
These foundational studies provide a clear picture of how SWB research has evolved alongside genetic studies, and how the two fields converged and later developed as a singular research topic. From the integration of behavioural genetics into psychological research on mental hygiene, studies now utilise these theoretical frameworks to provide a clear understanding of the complex interplay between genetic mechanisms and environmental factors in shaping SWB outcomes. These specific frameworks provide the basis for understanding the nuances of how heritability influences SWB, while considering the role of environmental determinants as well.

## Theoretical underpinnings

[Provide more detail]

### Conceptual frameworks

The conceptual frameworks relevant to understanding the heritability of SWB are informed by, and grounded in numerous, fundamental psychological and genetic models. These models facilitate a better understanding by explaining how certain genetic predispositions, alongside environmental determinants, influence SWB outcomes. Some of the primary theoretical frameworks relevant to this discussion include:
* The set-point theory of happiness (Headey, 2008; Headey, 2010);
* Dynamic equilibrium model
* The biopsychosocial model (Kirana et al., 2009; ).

### Application of theory

[Provide more detail]

#### Set-point theory of happiness

According to Headey (2008), the set-point theory proposes that individual happiness fluctuates along a genetically determined baseline. This model posits that the baseline for happiness and baseline variances between individuals are both attributable to predetermined genetic factors. On the other hand, life events are suggested to illicit fluctuations, causing temporary changes in happiness along the continuum of genetic happiness, before returning back to the baseline (Headey, 2008). This suggests, that while SWB is temporarily influenced by certain life-events, genetic predispositions are the primary forces driving and shaping SWB outcomes. Backed by research, early twin studies argued that approximately 50% of the variance in SWB is attributable to genetic factors.
However, while this seems to consider the relevant aspects of the interaction between genetic and environmental factors, this theory fails to recognise the potential impact of different life-events (Headey, 2010). While happiness supposedly returns back to the genetic baseline following fluctuations from life-events, life changing circumstances – such as winning the lottery or suffering the loss or impairment of physical/mental functionality – can permanently shift baseline happiness. Hence, according to this model, while genetic factors play a crucial role in SWB outcomes, they do not act entirely independent from environmental factors. In light of this studies have aimed to bridge this large gap in the theory by leading the focus toward a more 'dynamic' model of SWB heritability and changeability.

#### Dynamic equilibrium model

The dynamic equilibrium model builds upon the contentions and framework of the set-point theory, agreeing that life-events cause fluctuations of SWB, until returning to the genetic baseline of happiness (Headey, 2006). However, to fill in much of the set-point theory's gaps, this model provides a much more detailed description of varying environmental contexts that can override genetic factors. Ultimately, this model proposes that individuals largely share 'normal' equillibrium levels of life events and baseline SWB, grounded on the basis of age and personality (Headey & Wearing, 1989). However, only when external events begin to deviate from and exceed their equilibrium does baseline SWB shift. Specifically drastic events, in the form of life-altering circumstances/situations, all have the potential to shift this baseline, and thereby, the dynamic equilibrium and SWB baseline (Headey & Wearing, 1989). Moreover, this model also considers differing alterations of the equilibrium state over long-term periods, wherein, SWB baseline stabilises overtime in response to extended life-events, such as chronic stress or prolonged negative life circumstances (Headey & Wearing, 1989). However, another aspect of the dynamic equilibrium model takes into account the role of stable personality traits that contribute to the mediation of certain external events. For instance, despite the presence of ongoing stress and external pressures, individuals with a higher level of emotional stability may exhibit greater resistance to shifts in their SWB baseline (Headey & Wearing, 1989).
* Case study link to theory
* In her early teens, Emily remembers being very outgoing and happy most of the time. Even in moments where she got in trouble or hurt herself, her negative emotions were only ever temporary, until she returned to her usual happy self (set-point theory).
* However, as she got older, she can't help but feel the on-going stress and pressure to perform well in her exams shifted something in her ability to regulate her emotions. As the stress continued to build up over the years, Emily feels as though her mood is only temporarily happy before returning a constant state of anxiety and sadness (dynamic-equilibrium theory).

#### Biopsychosocial model

As the name suggests, the Biopsychosocial model incorporates relevant aspects of biological, psychological, and sociological perspectives into the focus of SWB. This model proposes biological, psychological and social determinants all perform crucial and interrelated functions in shaping the outcomes of SWB (Kirana, Rosen & Hatzichristou, 2009). Moreover, research applications of this model have examined the multifaceted nature of SWB outcomes, wherein, SWB variance between subjects can be attributable to any one or more of the three perspectives. While the biological aspect of this model supports certain aspects of similar frameworks, like the set-point theory, the psychological and social components add a layer of complexity by considering how certain mechanisms, both independent and collaborative, shape SWB outcomes (Kirana, Rosen & Hatzichristou, 2009). For instance, while an individual may possess a genetically high SWB baseline, poor psychological mechanisms (e.g., negative thinking patterns) can still influence fluctuations along, or even shifts of the entire baseline. Moreover, social determinants also provide another level of consideration, wherein, the compounding effect of poor psychological mechanisms can either be reinforced or lessened depending on the social stimuli (Mahama, 2021). According to this model, this is also the case for older demographics, where SWB baseline shifts due to the decline in psychological mechanisms and social environments overtime (Mahama, 2021).
Knowledge quiz
According to the set-point theory, individuals with a high baseline, who experience short-term stress are likely to experience what SWB outcomes?
Minor shifts of their SWB baseline
Fluctuations along their baseline
Major shifts of their SWB baseline
A continuous decline, away from their SWB baseline
True or false: According to the biopsychosocial model, the decline of psychological mechanism and social environment over the course of ageing triggers negative shifts of baseline SWB?
False
True :

## Conclusion

SWB refers to internally evaluated perceptions of happiness and life-satisfaction (Bartels, 2015). These internal evaluations are largely shaped by complex interactions between genetic predispositions and environmental factors, making it both heritable and changeable. Derived from pivotal heritability research, such as twin and adoption studies, both psychologists and biologists alike underscore the significant role of heritability in SWB outcomes. Giving way to key conceptual frameworks, such as Headey's (2008; 2010) set-point theory model, genetic factors contribute to the predisposition of baseline SWB. The dynamic-equilibrium model builds upon this understanding and posits that while life-events trigger SWB fluctuations along the baseline, certain events that exceed the equilibrium can illicit shifts of the entire baseline. Additionally, this perspective argues that continuous exposure to certain social events can also cause the baseline to shift as it stabilises to the conditions of the environment. On the other hand, the biopsychosocial model recognises how the genetic baseline can be shifted or manipulated at the hands of compounded psychosocial factors. Specifically, poor social conditions, and dwindling psychological functionality in crucial processes (e.g., emotional regulation, decision-making, etc.) can cause the baseline to shift or continuously decline over extended periods of time.
Given these relevant theoretical perspectives, SWB is, for the most part, genetically predetermined. However, with the compounded influence of psychological determinants and social conditions, SWB becomes malleable. Ultimately, while genetic factors provide the foundation for SWB, psychological mechanisms, involved in processing life-events, largely contribute towards shaping SWB outcomes. In the same capacity, conscious actions to maintain healthy psychological functioning, and adequately navigate through social conditions, all have the potential to override genetically determine SWB outcomes. Thus, while SWB is to some extent heritable, it is also highly responsive to psychological influence and social change.