Personality Traits, Emotional Intelligence, and Multiple Happiness

Author info: Correspondence should be sent to: Prof Adrian Furnham,

Department of Psychology, University College London,

26 Bedford Way, London WC1H 0AP, e-mail: [email protected]

North American Journal of Psychology, 2007, Vol. 9, No. 3, 439-462.

NAJP

Personality Traits, Emotional Intelligence,

and Multiple Happiness

Adrian Furnham

Irene Christoforou University of London

This study set out to re-examine the predictors of self-reported trait

happiness as measured by the Oxford Happiness Inventory (OHI) as well

as the predictors of various happiness types proposed by Morris (2004).

In all, 120 Cypriot participants completed the 4 questionnaires: OHI,

Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ), Trait Emotional Intelligence

Questionnaire (TEIQue-SF), and Morris Multiple Happiness Inventory

(MMHI). It was hypothesized that Extraversion and Neuroticism would

be, respectively, positively and negatively correlated with happiness and

trait EI would be a positive predictor of happiness. Considering Morris’

happiness types, it was hypothesized that specific individual difference

variables (Extraversion, trait EI, religiousness, Neuroticism) would be

predictive of different happiness conditions or motivations (Sensation

seeking, Interpersonal happiness, Spiritual happiness and Negative

happiness) respectively. All but one hypothesis was confirmed:

Neuroticism was not a significant predictor of Negative happiness. This

study demonstrated that high trait EI and extraversion are predictive of

overall happiness and most happiness types proposed by Morris, although

other factors, like religiousness, are also important. Implications for

increasing well-being are discussed.

For many years, the topic of happiness remained neglected, with

research concentrating on aspects of human unhappiness, such as

depression, anxiety, and emotional disorders. Recently, however, this

imbalance has been corrected and there are now many studies of what

has come to be called “subjective well-being” (SWB)—a term used as a

synonym for happiness. Indeed, there is now a whole field called positive

psychology dedicated to understanding the process of human happiness.

Specifically, studies have examined the definitions, correlates, and

predictors of happiness (e.g., Argyle, 1992, 2001; Diener, 1984; Eysenck,

1990; Myers, 1992; Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000; Vitterso &

Nilsen, 2004).

Undoubtedly, many environmental factors have been shown to have a

strong effect on happiness, such as work, money, and leisure activities.

440 NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY

However, some researchers have concluded that personality is a greater

determinant of happiness than race, social class, money, social

relationships, work, leisure, religion, or other external variables (Diener

et al., 1999). Indeed, enduring features of the person can have a strong

impact, affecting happiness from the “inside” rather than the “outside”

(Eysenck, 1983). For example, Diener and Larsen (1984) found that

positive and negative affect in various work and leisure situations was

more due to persons (52%) than to situations (23%). There is also

interaction between the effects of person and situations. Larsen and

Ketelaar (1991) found that extraverts react more strongly to positive

stimuli than do introverts, so that the combination of extraversion and

pleasant situations produces positive affect. Individuals can also choose

or avoid situations and relationships in a way that promotes their well

being. Argyle and Lu (1990) found that the happiness of extraverts could

be partly explained by their choice of enjoyable social situations, while

Argyle (1994) found that the socially unskilled avoid many social

situations that others enjoy. Similarly, Furnham (1981) had found that

individuals select situations that fulfill various personality trait needs.

Various studies have examined the relation of personality traits to

happiness and have yielded consistent findings. Extraversion and

Neuroticism have been repeatedly found to be the strongest predictors of

happiness levels, accounting for up to half of the total variance in various

measures (Argyle & Lu, 1990; Brebner, 1998; Francis, 1999; Francis et

al., 1998; Myers & Diener, 1995). Eysenck (1983) noted that “Happiness

is a thing called stable extraversion…the positive effect in happiness

seemed to be related to easy sociability, with a natural, pleasant

interaction with other people…then it only makes sense that happiness

can be associated with extraversion. Similarly, if worries and anxieties

make up negative affect in happiness, it can easily be seen that instability

and neuroticism are also connected to unhappiness” (p.67).

Fewer studies have looked at the relationship between happiness and

emotional intelligence (EI). Trait EI is a constellation of emotion-related,

self-perceived abilities and dispositions located at the “lower” levels of

personality hierarchies (Petrides & Furnham, 2001). Petrides and

Furnham (2003) identified 15 facets, which have provided the basis for

the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue). These include

adaptability, assertiveness, emotion perception, expression and

regulation, relationship skills, social competence, empathy, and stress

management. People with high trait EI scores believe that they are “in

touch” with their emotions and that they can regulate them in a way that

promotes well-being. Furnham and Petrides (2003) found that EI was a

positive predictor of happiness, explaining over 50% of its total variance.

Whilst extraversion, openness, and stability were also correlated with

Furnham & Christoforou PERSONALITY TRAITS 441

happiness in the regression, emotional intelligence was the most

significant predictor.

More recently, Chamorro-Premuzic, Bennett, and Furnham (2007)

found that four of the Big Five factors, namely stability, extraversion,

conscientiousness, and agreeableness, were positively correlated with

both happiness and trait EI, which explained 18% of unique variance

(over and above age and the Big Five) in happiness. Further, a significant

amount of shared variance between happiness and the Big Five was

explained by trait EI, which partly mediated the paths from stability and

conscientiousness to happiness and fully mediated the link between

agreeableness and happiness.

Previous happiness studies have tended to look at happiness mostly as

a unidimensional variable. In fact, many recent studies have used the

Oxford Happiness Inventory (OHI; Argyle, Martin, & Crossland, 1989)

as a trait measure of happiness. This 29-item questionnaire was designed

to measure happiness as a whole. However, the concept that happiness is

multidimensional rather than unidimensional is not entirely new.

Furnham and Brewin (1990) factor analyzed the OHI and found three

main components of happiness. Similarly, Cheng and Furnham (2003)

showed that the OHI can be subdivided into Achievement and

Satisfaction, Enjoyment, and Vigour and Health. These subcategories of

the OHI, however, do not clearly represent different types of happiness.

An idea recently put forward by Morris (2004) is that there are various

distinguishable (but probably related) types of happiness. This is a

multidimensional concept not unlike that advanced by researchers who

appear to have “discovered” multiple intelligences (Gardner, 1999).

Morris identifies 17 types of happiness and proposes that they are all

essentially derived from our evolutionary background. For example,

“target happiness,” the joy of anticipating new experiences and

challenges, stems from our ancient hunting past. “Competitive

happiness,” the joy of winning, is derived from our social background, as

we evolved in small tribes.

In contrast, “cooperative happiness” is based on our need to support

one another to survive. According to Morris (2004), we did not lose our

old biological urges to eat, drink, mate, and keep warm; these are still

present to give us various forms of “sensual happiness.” In addition, our

increasingly complex brain has given us important sources of “cerebral

happiness,” in which acts of intelligence have become their own rewards.

According to Morris, these major categories of happiness, along with a

few others, make up a simple classification of “happiness-types.” The

definitions of these can be seen in Table 1.

Certainly some of Morris’ ideas regarding multiple happiness could

be challenged. It seems difficult to establish the evolutionary basis of


some of his happiness categories (especially chemical or comic

happiness). Next, the types of happiness seem so phenomenologically

different that it is not always clear why they should be labelled with the

same state, namely happiness. While this fact helps to ensure they are

distinct from one another, it does pose the problem of why they fall under

the same label. Morris does not indicate if these 17 types are domains or

primary factors (in the psychometric sense) and that there may be higher

order facets, or super factors, such that the 17 distinguishable factors may

fit into a logically structured hierarchy. Although there are numerous

issues to be investigated, it appears that no studies have been conducted

to date regarding Morris’ taxonomy, thus making this study one of the

first in the field.

TABLE 1 Definitions of the Seventeen Morris’ Happiness Types Target happiness: The happiness of anticipating new projects, experiences, and

challenges, working with them, and (possibly) being successful in reaching these personal

goals. Target happiness is happiness through being an achiever.

Competitive happiness: The happiness of winning at the expense of a rival, usually

through the expenditure of huge effort. Competitive happiness is happiness through being a

winner.

Cooperative happiness: The happiness derived from helping others, either by small

cooperative gestures or by doing “good works” and/or helping other species. Cooperative

happiness is happiness through being a helper.

Genetic happiness: The happiness of falling in love, pair-bonding, giving birth and

successfully rearing one’s offspring, and the happiness of caring for one’s grandchildren.

Genetic happiness is happiness through being a relative.

Sensual happiness: The happiness of experiencing a primary biological pleasure such as a

delicious meal, a sexual experience, or some other pleasure of the flesh such as bathing,

oiling, and massaging. Sensual happiness is happiness through being a hedonist.

Cerebral happiness: The happiness derived from playing games with one’s brain where no

ulterior motive is involved—from the most trivial (card games and computer games,

puzzles and brain teasers) to the most profound (artistic creativity and scientific research).

Cerebral happiness is happiness through being an intellectual.

Rhythmic happiness: The happiness associated with intensely rhythmic activities like

music, dancing, singing, aerobics, gymnastics, athletics, and even with activities such as

revivalist religious celebrations, synchronized swimming, dervish whirling, voodoo

possession rituals, and military marching (i.e., any activity that involves a “beat”).

Rhythmic happiness is happiness through being a dancer.

Painful happiness: The pleasure derived from sado-masochistic rituals or mental

masochism (seeing any form of indulgence as disgusting and wicked and living a life where

such things are prohibited by oneself). Mental masochists may include health fanatics, diet-

slaves, teetotallers, vegans, anti-smokers, celibates, and even terrorists. Painful happiness is

happiness through being a masochist.

Dangerous happiness: The happiness derived from deliberate, voluntary risk-taking, such

as the excitement of successfully surviving a self-imposed hazard such as gambling or an

extreme sport (e.g., bungee-jumping, hang-gliding). Dangerous happiness is happiness

through being a risk-taker.

Selective happiness: The happiness depending on ignoring the horrors of life all around

one (i.e., the joy experienced by refusing to recognise the problems that life throws at you).

Selective happiness is happiness through being selective.


Tranquil happiness: The form of happiness obtained by contemplation and isolation from

the cares of the world (i.e., a deliberate philosophical or religious shutting out of the rest of

the world and a turning in on oneself, reaching a deep inner feeling of freedom and non-

attachment). Tranquil happiness is happiness through being a meditator.

Devout happiness: The spiritual happiness experienced by deeply religious individuals by

having total, blind faith in the tenets of a particular religion. Devout happiness is happiness

through being a believer.

Negative happiness: The happiness felt when moments of occasional pleasure interrupt

constant mental anguish or the happiness felt at the moment of relief from prolonged

physical pain (when pills are taken) or the happiness felt when there is a brief interruption

of constant boredom, lack of direction, insecurity, or anxiety. Negative happiness is

happiness through being a sufferer.

Chemical happiness: The happiness obtained from a narcotic-induced state. This could

include use of “hard-drugs” or “soft-drugs” such as tea, coffee, tobacco, and alcohol.

Chemical happiness is happiness through being a drug-taker.

Fantasy happiness: The happiness obtained when suspending one’s sense of reality long

enough to enjoy fiction of some sort (e.g., when daydreaming, storytelling, enjoying

fictional writing and theatre, watching soap operas/cartoons/films). Fantasy happiness is

happiness through being a day-dreamer.

Comic happiness: The pleasure of confronting one’s fears in a completely secure context

(e.g., when listening to the outrageous comments made by a comedian, when riding in a

roller coaster, or enjoying a horror film safely in the cinema). Comic happiness is happiness

through being a laugher.

Accidental happiness: The happiness derived from an accidental positive event (e.g.,

finding a banknote in the street, winning the lottery, or having your suitcase come up first

on the carousel after a long, tiring flight). Accidental happiness is happiness through being

fortunate.

The current study aimed to determine the dimensional structure of

ratings of Morris’ happiness types. This was done by using a

questionnaire (the Morris Multiple Happiness Inventory) specifically

devised for this study, which contained brief descriptions of the 17

happiness types followed by a question requiring participants to indicate

the extent to which they believe each happiness type applies to them. The

study also aimed to re-examine the predictors of trait happiness as

measured by the OHI, especially trait EI and personality. In addition, the

study investigated the extent to which the factors that emerged from

Morris’ happiness types predicted overall happiness as measured by the

OHI. The importance of several demographic variables in predicting

happiness was examined. Moreover, the study examined the predictors of

some of Morris’ happiness types.

It was hypothesized that Extraversion would be positively correlated

while Neuroticism would be negatively correlated with happiness (H1

and H2), a consistently reported finding (e.g., Myers & Diener, 1995).

Based on previous research (Furnham & Petrides, 2003), it was

hypothesized that trait EI would be a positive predictor of happiness,


(H3) and that this relationship would remain statistically significant after

controlling for the effects of personality.

Considering the happiness types proposed by Morris, it was

hypothesized that different factors would be important in predicting

different happiness types. Specifically, it was hypothesized that trait EI

would be predictive of cooperative and competitive happiness (H4)

because these types are related to relationship skills and social

competence, aspects which are measured by EI. Individuals high in trait

EI are capable of withstanding pressure and regulating stress (Furnham &

Petrides, 2003); this is necessary in order to derive pleasure through

competition with others, which is usually very stressful. Similarly, to

derive happiness by being helpful to others, one must be capable of

taking someone else’s perspective, understanding other peoples’ feelings,

and influencing other people’s feelings in a positive way. These are all

abilities thought to be possessed by individuals high in trait EI. The next

hypotheses were more speculative and based on the ideas in Morris’s

book.

It was hypothesized that dangerous, rhythmic, selective, target,

cerebral, and sensual happiness would be best predicted by Extraversion

(H5) because certain facets of Extraversion, such as assertiveness,

impulsiveness, and sociability (Argyle, 2001), are central to the above

happiness types. Extraversion describes a person who is sociable, active,

assertive, and impulsive. Extraverts demonstrate an increased sensitivity

to reward signals (Gray, 1981); this can be related to sensual happiness,

where a primary biological pleasure becomes a reward. Extraverts also

seek a sense of achievement, which can be related to cerebral happiness,

where rewards are derived from acts of intelligence, and target happiness,

where pleasure is obtained through striving to reach a goal. Extraversion

is related to thrill and adventure seeking, and encompasses behaviors

such as engaging in risky activities (physically or mentally) relating to

dangerous happiness. Extraversion is related to sensation seeking, which

could lead extraverts to experience greater rhythmic happiness and could

be associated with intensely rhythmic activities like music, dancing, and

singing.

It was hypothesized that negative and chemical happiness would be

predicted by neuroticism, the correlation being positive (H6). High

scorers in Neuroticism have been said to be at elevated risk for certain

kinds of psychopathology, especially depression, generalized fear, and

agoraphobia. For example, Schmitz, Kugler, and Rollnik (2003) found

that high Neuroticism was strongly associated with depression disorders.

Since negative happiness is defined by Morris as the pleasure

experienced as a result of the interruption of ongoing mental anguish,

lack of direction, insecurity, or anxiety, it is expected that participants


who consider this happiness type to be important in their lives will score

higher in Neuroticism. Terracciano and Costa (2004) found that current

smokers had higher Neuroticism scores than non-smokers, and Lodhi and

Thakur (1993) found that heroin addicts have higher Neuroticism and

Psychoticism scores. These findings can be related to chemical

happiness, defined by Morris as the pleasure obtained from a narcotic-

induced state, whether through the use of “hard-drugs” or “soft-drugs.”

Therefore high chemical happiness should also be associated with

elevated Neuroticism.

Finally, it was hypothesized that tranquil and devout happiness would

be best predicted by participants’ degree of religiousness (H7), as Morris

specifically defines devout happiness as happiness through being a

believer and tranquil happiness as the result of a philosophical or

religious shutting out of the rest of the world and a turning in on oneself,

reaching a deep inner feeling of freedom and non-attachment.

METHOD

Participants

A total of 120 participants completed the questionnaires. All were

Greek Cypriots living in the South part of Cyprus. There were 44

(36.7%) males and 76 (63.3%) females. Their ages ranged from 16-82,

with a mean age of 36.5 years old and standard deviation 12.5 years.

Seventeen (14.2%) of them were students, 76 (63.3%) were employed, 3

(2.5%) were unemployed, and the remaining 24 (20%) did not specify.

Eighty-four (70%) were currently with a partner (either in a relationship,

living together, or married), 35 (29.2%) were not with a partner (either

alone, divorced/separated, or widowed), and one person did not specify.

The vast majority (107, or 89.2%) identified with the Christian Orthodox

religion, 4 (3.3%) with Christian-Roman Catholic, 1 with Hindu, 1 with

“other belief system,” and 7 (5.8%) with no religion at all. Participants’

annual income ranged from “less than £5000” annually to “over £50000,”

with a mean of £20000. Of those who were not students, 16 (15.5%) had

a GCSE/O-level or similar as a highest educational qualification, 5

(4.9%) A-level or similar, 27 (26.2%) a BA/BSc or similar, 16 (15.5%)

an MA/MSc or similar, 10 (9.7%) an MBA or similar, 6 (5.8%) a PhD,

and 21 (20.4%) reported having some other highest educational

qualification (“other”), not specified.

Materials

The Oxford Happiness Inventory. This is a 29-item questionnaire,

based on a four-choice format, measuring trait happiness (Argyle,

Martin, & Crossland, 1989). High scores indicate high state happiness. It

has an internal reliability Cronbach’s alpha of 0.90 and a test-retest


reliability of 0.78. Some of the items are almost identical to the Beck

Depression Inventory but reversed on content, and it has subcategories of

personal achievement, enjoyment and fun in life, and vigour and good

health, according to Furnham and Brewin (1990). It has a reported

validity of 0.43 with friends’ ratings of happiness (Argyle et al., 1989). It

also correlates with positive affect, life satisfaction, and depression at r =

0.40-0.60. The PsycLIT database indicates that over a dozen studies used

it as a trait measure of happiness over the past decade (Argyle, 2001;

Cheng & Furnham, 2003; Furnham, Cheng, & Shirasu, 2001).

The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. This is a 90-item

questionnaire containing extraversion, neuroticism, psychoticism, and lie

scales (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975). It has Cronbach’s alpha coefficient

reliabilities between 0.73 and 0.90. Items are responded to on a 6-point

scale from 1 (disagree completely) to 6 (agree completely). The

questionnaire has been widely used because of its high validity and

prominence in personality research.

Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire-Short Form (TEIQue-

SF). This is a 30-item questionnaire designed to measure global trait

emotional intelligence (trait EI). It is based on the full form of the

TEIQue (Petrides & Furnham, 2003), which covers the trait EI sampling

domain comprehensively. The TEIQue-SF provides highly reliable

global trait EI scores that correlate meaningfully with a wide range of

diverse criteria, including coping styles, life satisfaction, personality

disorders, perceived job control, and job satisfaction (Petrides et al.,

2003). Items are responded to on a 7-point Likert scale, from 1 (disagree

completely) to 7 (agree completely).

MMHI (Morris Multiple Happiness Inventory). This questionnaire

was devised for this study to investigate the applicability of several

happiness types in the general population. It consists of brief (3-4 line)

definitions of the 17 different happiness types described by Morris in his

book “The Nature of Happiness” (Morris, 2004; see Table 1). Each

description of a particular happiness type is followed by this question:

“To what extent does this type of happiness make you happy?” Items are

responded to on a 6-point scale where 1 = not at all and 6 = very much.

Demographic variables. This questionnaire explored various

demographic variables in relation to happiness. It includes questions

about participants’ age, sex, marital status, annual income, current

occupation, job happiness, religion, degree of religiousness, and higher

educational qualifications.

Procedure

All the participants were recruited from researchers’ contacts in

Cyprus from a wide range of settings. Participants were contacted face-


to-face by the researcher and informed about the nature of the study

(although no specific details of the hypotheses were mentioned that could

bias the results in any way). They were then asked to fill in the

questionnaires in their free time, on their own, and in quiet conditions if

they decided that they wished to participate in the study voluntarily. The

response rate was high (96%). Originally, 130 questionnaires were

handed out, of which five (4%) were not returned and five had to be

excluded from the analysis due to incomplete data. Most questionnaires

were returned by hand the next day and some were returned by post. The

good response rate was due to participants being reminded to send back

their questionnaire.

Questionnaires were presented in Greek (participants’ native

language) to ensure that the content was entirely clear to the participants.

The Greek versions of the EPQ and TEIQue-SF already existed, as these

were used in previous research. The OHI and MMHI were translated into

Greek by the researcher and back translated into in English by another

bilingual to ensure content validity. The original English version, as well

as the back translation of the questionnaires, are available. Each

participant received a pack of the five questionnaires mentioned above

(OHI, MMHI, EPQ, TEIQue-SF, and the demographic variables

questionnaire). The order in which the questionnaires were presented was

randomized to prevent response bias resulting from fatigue effects.

RESULTS

Factor Analysis

To examine the underlying structure of the Morris Multiple

Happiness Inventory (MMHI), a factor analysis was carried out. Factor

analysis yielded 6 factors with an eigenvalue of >1.00, which account for

62.10% of the total variance. The first factor, labelled Escaping reality,

accounted for 13.80% of the variance. The three happiness types loading

onto this factor were “fantasy happiness,” “comic happiness,” and

“accidental happiness.” Within factor 1, all three items had mean scores

higher than 3, which indicated that the participants generally reported

feeling happy by temporarily enjoying a positive experience they knew

was either fictional or out of the ordinary.

The second factor contained items referring to Pleasures of the mind

and the senses. The happiness types loading onto this factor were

“sensual happiness,” “cerebral happiness,” and “rhythmic happiness.”

Factor 2 accounted for 11.84% of variance. The mean scores of the items

within this factor (all being above 4) revealed that pleasures of the mind

and the senses made a significant contribution to participants’ happiness.


TABLE 2 Factor Analysis (Varimax Rotated) for the Beliefs on Morris’

Different Happiness Types showing mean scores (and factor

loadings in brackets)

Factor Happiness type M SD

Loading

1. Escaping reality Comic ( .81) 4.45 1.51

Accidental (.79) 4.43 1.57

.

Fantasy (.61) 3.64 1.66

2. Pleasures of the mind Rhythmic (.73) 4.48 1.43

and the senses Cerebral (.69) 4.56 1.40

Sensual (.61) 4.76 1.35

3. Biological happiness Painful (.72) 1.52 1.09

.

Chemical (.62) 1.49 .98

Genetic (-.61) 5.17 1.20

4. Spiritual happiness Devout (.84) 3.78 1.61

Tranquil (.82) 3.93 1.63

5. Competitive happiness (.76) 4.26 1.57

.

6. Bipolar happiness Negative (.81) 3.03 1.72

Cooperative (.53) 5.23 .94

Selective 3.33 1.71

Target 5.30 .93

Dangerous 2.81 1.64

___________________________________________________________ *For Selective, Target and Dangerous happiness only the Mean and SD is

reported because these types had an eigenvalue of <1 (not extracted by

factor analysis)

The third factor, accounting for 10.83% of the variance, was labelled

Biological happiness. “Genetic happiness,” “painful happiness,” and

“chemical happiness” loaded onto factor 3. The low mean scores of

painful and chemical happiness (both lower than 2) indicated that

participants did not report deriving much happiness from drugs and any

form of masochism. On the contrary, genetic happiness was negatively

correlated with these two happiness types and had a mean score higher


than 5, indicating that participants thought this was very important to

their happiness.

The fourth factor, Spiritual happiness, included “tranquil happiness”

and “devout happiness.” This factor accounted for 9.65% of the variance,

and the mean scores of the two items (both above 3) in this factor

indicated that, on the whole, tranquil happiness was moderately

significant for participants.

Competitive happiness, the fifth factor, was made up of “competitive

happiness” alone. Factor 5 accounted for 8.59% of the variance. The

mean score was above 4, showing that happiness derived from

competition with other people was generally quite important to

participants.

TABLE 3 Correlates of the Oxford Happiness Inventory

M SD r with happiness

Trait EI 141.87 20.18 .60**

Personality N 74.48 16.69 -.39**

E 78.81 15.08 .54**

P 50.10 8.71 -.10

L 74.88 9.42 .12

Morris’ Factor 1 12.53 3.68 .10

Happiness Factor 2 13.79 3.14 .23*

Types Factor 3 8.18 1.83 -.07

Factor 4 7.70 2.80 .03

Factor 5 4.26 1.57 .27*

Factor 6 8.27 1.85 .02

Note. *p < .01. **p < .001.

Finally, factor 6, accounting for 7.42% of the variance, was labelled

Bipolar happiness. “Negative happiness” as well as “cooperative

happiness” loaded onto this final factor. It was labelled Bipolar

Happiness because it included pleasure obtained through the self being

helped (negative happiness) vs. pleasure through the self helping others

(cooperative happiness). The mean score for negative happiness (3)

indicated that overall, negative happiness was the happiness type that

applied least to participants, while the mean score for cooperative

happiness (above 5) indicated that participants derived much of their

happiness from helping others. Table 2 shows the results of the factor

analysis.


Testing H1-H3: Predicting Trait Happiness From the Factors

Extracted From the MMHI, Personality, EI, and Demographic Variables

Table 3 summarizes the zero-order correlations between happiness

and the other measures in the study. These can be compared with the

results from the study by Furnham and Petrides (2003). In the present

study, trait EI was the strongest (positive) correlate of happiness,

followed by Extraversion and then Neuroticism. As shown by many

other studies, Extraversion was positively correlated, while Neuroticism

was negatively correlated with happiness. Psychoticism and the Lie Scale

were not significantly correlated with happiness. Factors 2 and 5

extracted from the MMHI were significant positive correlates of

happiness, but the correlations were weaker than the ones between

happiness and trait EI, Neuroticism, and Extraversion.

TABLE 4 Results of Three-step Hierarchical Regressions with the

Oxford Happiness Inventory as the Dependent Variable

Regression Beta t

Step1. F (1,118) = 67.06; Adj. R square = .36

Trait EI .34 8.19***

Step 2. F (5,114) = 16.48; Adj. R square = .39

Trait EI .20 3.12**

N -.12 -1.97

E .21 2.89**

P .06 .59

L -.08 -.91


Trait EI .17 2.53*

N -.13 -2.21*

E .21 2.68**

P .04 .43

L -.10 -.96

Factor 1 -.06 -.23

Factor 2 .09 .27

Factor 3 -.30 -.62

Factor 4 -.19 -.62

Factor 5 1.18 2.04*

Factor 6 .24 .51

* p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

A series of regressions were carried out to establish whether

emotional intelligence, personality traits, the factors extracted from the

MMHI, and a series of demographic variables were significant predictors

of trait happiness as measured by participants’ score on the OHI. A three-

step hierarchical regression was performed, whereby happiness was

regressed on trait EI (step 1), personality (step 2), and the factors


extracted from the MMHI (step 3). These results are summarized in

Table 4. Trait EI was found to be a positive predictor of happiness,

accounting for 36% of the total variance. As revealed by simple

regressions, personality alone (N, E, P, and L collectively) accounted for

37% of the variance in OHI scores (F(4,115) = 16.88, p < .001), while

Morris’ factors accounted collectively for only 11% of the variance

(F(6,113) = 2.35, p < .05), although the regression was still significant at

the 5% level. Adding personality to an equation containing EI led to an

increase of 6% in R square, which was significant. The R square change

in the last step of the hierarchical regression (where the six factors of

Morris’ happiness types were collectively entered into the equation) was

not statistically significant (F-change (6,108) = .84, p = ns).

Finally, the importance of demographic factors in predicting

happiness was examined. Various demographic variables were examined

independently by one-way ANOVAS, and the effect of age was assessed

by a simple regression with OHI as the dependent variable. Sex, age,

marital status, annual income, education, and religiousness were all non-

significant. Only job happiness was significant in predicting trait

happiness as measured by the OHI (F(2,116) = 9.20, p < .001). Higher

job satisfaction tended to be correlated with high happiness levels.

Testing H4: Competitive and Cooperative Happiness Are Best

Predicted by Trait EI

It was predicted that trait EI would be the best predictor of

competitive and cooperative happiness because trait EI is related to

emotion regulation, relationship skills, and social competence (Furnham

& Petrides, 2001), necessary ingredients for dealing effectively with

other people and deriving pleasure through interpersonal processes such

as competition and cooperation.

A composite variable consisting of the scores for competitive and

cooperative happiness added together was computed and was termed

Interpersonal happiness. The hypothesis was tested by performing a

three-step hierarchical regression whereby Interpersonal happiness was

regressed on trait EI (step 1), personality (step 2), and the OHI (step 3).

Trait EI was the best predictor, accounting for 9% of the variance. A

simple regression with Interpersonal happiness as the dependent variable

and the OHI as the independent variable revealed that the OHI accounted

for 8% of the variance alone (F(1,118) = 9.51, p < .01). As shown by

other simple regression, personality alone (N, E, P, and L collectively)

accounted for only 6% of the variance in Interpersonal happiness

(F(4,115) = 1.93, p = ns). Adding personality to an equation containing

trait EI did not significantly improve prediction of factor 5. The addition

of the OHI in the last step of the hierarchical regression was also non-

significant (F-change (1,113) = 3.99, p = ns). Therefore, in order of


importance, trait EI was the best predictor for this variable, followed by

happiness as measured by the OHI, and then personality. The results of

the three-step hierarchical regression are shown in Table 5.

TABLE 5 Results of Three-step Hierarchical Regression With

Interpersonal Happiness as the Dependent Variable

Regression Beta t


Trait EI .29 3.32**


Trait EI .38 2.73**

N -.21 1.91

E .00 .00

P .05 .51

L .12 1.26


Trait EI .31 2.15*

N -.24 2.21*

E -.06 -.46

P .04 .42

L .13 1.41

OHI .20 1.75

*p < .05. ** p < .01.

Sex, age, marital status, annual income, education, religiousness, and

job happiness were all non-significant in predicting Interpersonal

happiness as revealed by a series of one-way ANOVAS.

Testing H5: Extraversion Is the Best Predictor of Dangerous, Target,

Rhythmic, Sensual, and Cerebral Happiness

It was hypothesized that the above happiness types would be

positively associated with Extraversion because certain facets of

Extraversion, such as sensation seeking, sensitivity to reward signals,

achievement seeking, and thrill and adventure seeking, are connected to

these happiness types.

To test this hypothesis, a score consisting of all the above happiness

types added together was computed. This variable was termed Sensation

seeking. A three-step hierarchical regression was performed, whereby

Sensation seeking was regressed on Extraversion (step 1), EI (step 2), and

the OHI (step 3). The results are shown in Table 6. As predicted,

Extraversion was by far the strongest predictor, accounting for 20% of

the total variance, with extraverts tending to score highly on this variable.

As revealed by a simple regression where Sensation seeking was

regressed on EI, this accounted for only 8% of the total variance

(F(1,118) = 10.06, p< .01). A simple regression where Factor 2 was


regressed on OHI showed that happiness alone accounted for only 10%

of the variability in scores (F(1,118) = 13.23, p < .001). Adding EI to an

equation containing Extraversion did not significantly improve prediction

of this variable, nor did adding the OHI score to a model containing

Extraversion and EI.

TABLE 6 Results of Three-step Hierarchical Regressions with Sensation

seeking as the Dependent Variable

Regression Beta t


Extraversion .44 5.35*



EI -.03 -.29



EI -.09 -.78

OHI .14 1.33

*p < .001.

The only demographic variable that was significant in the prediction

of this composite variable was age, as shown by a simple regression with

Sensation seeking as the dependent variable (F(1,118) = 5.49, p < .05,

Adj. R square = .04). Age was negatively correlated with Sensation

seeking at -.21.

Testing H6: Negative and Chemical Happiness Are Best Predicted by

Neuroticism

It was predicted that the two above happiness types would be best

predicted by Neuroticism because of the previously documented

association between high Neuroticism and certain kinds of

psychopathology and drug use.

A composite score of these two happiness types was calculated by

adding the two individual scores. This variable was labelled Negative

happiness. A four-step hierarchical regression was performed, whereby

this composite variable was regressed on Neuroticism (step 1),

Personality (N, E, P, and L collectively entered into the equation; step 2),

trait EI (step 3), and the OHI (step 4). The results are summarized in

Table 7. Neuroticism was not a significant predictor of Negative

happiness, accounting for 0% of the variability in scores alone. Adding

E, P, and L significantly improved the prediction of this variable,

personality collectively accounting for 8% of the total variance. The

strongest correlate of Negative happiness was, in fact, the Lie scale,

where participants scoring high in the Lie scale tended to report deriving

less pleasure from chemical and negative happiness (r = -.24, p < .01).


The last two steps in the multiple hierarchical regression were not

statistically significant.

TABLE 7 Results of the Four-step Hierarchical Regression With Nega-

tive Happiness as the Dependent Variable

Regression Beta t

Step1. F (1,118) = .04; Adj. R square = -.01

N .02 1.20


N -.10 -1.01

E -.13 -1.37

P .03 .30

L -.25 -2.57*


N -.11 -1.01

E -.11 -.87

P .02 .26

L -.25 -2.55*

Trait EI -.04 -.25


N -.12 -1.02

E -.10 -.78

P .03 .26

L -.25 -2.54*

Trait EI -.03 -.19

OHI -.02 -.19

*p < .05.

Again, the significance of all demographic variables was examined

and only age was found to be a significant predictor of Negative

happiness (F(1,118) = 5.72, p < .05, Adj. R square = .04). Age correlated

negatively with Negative happiness at -.22.

Testing H7: Tranquil and Devout Happiness Are Best Predicted by

Participants’ Degree of Religiousness

It was hypothesized that tranquil and devout happiness would be best

predicted by participants’ degree of religiousness based on Morris’

descriptions about what constitutes these happiness types.

To examine this prediction, a four-step hierarchical regression was

performed, whereby Factor 4 of the MMHI (Spiritual happiness

consisting of tranquil and devout happiness) was regressed on

religiousness (step 1), EI (step 2), personality (step 3), and the OHI (step

4). The results can be seen in Table 8. Religiousness was by far the

strongest predictor of Spiritual happiness, accounting for 17% of the

total variance, while as revealed by a series of simple regressions (all


non-significant) with Spiritual happiness as the dependent variable,

personality alone accounted for 6% of the total variance, trait EI for 1%,

and the OHI alone for 0%. Adding trait EI, personality, and state

happiness to the equation had no improvement in prediction of this

factor. None of the demographic variables was a significant predictor.

None of the demographic variables was significant in predicting

Spiritual happiness.

TABLE 8 Results of Four-step Hierarchical Regressions with Spiritual

Happiness as the Dependent Variable

Regression Beta t


Religiousness .42 4.96*



Trait EI .07 .78



Trait EI .14 1.06

N .13 1.27

E -.07 -.63

P -.01 -.06

L .16 1.79

Step 4. F(7,112) = 4.27; Adj. R square = .16


Trait EI .17 1.24

N .12 1.11

E -.05 -.41

P .00 .01

L .16 1.70

OHI -.09 -.80

*p < .001.

DISCUSSION

All hypotheses but one (H6) in this study were confirmed by the data

analysis. An inspection of the means of the measures in this study

(TEIQue-SF, OHI, and EPQ) showed that Cypriot participants had very

similar results to British participants who took part in previous studies

(e.g., Cheng & Furnham, 2003; Furnham & Petrides, 2004), scoring

roughly the same as British participants in trait EI, happiness, and

personality. This suggests that the correlates of happiness are universal

and not culturally bound.


It was hypothesized that Extraversion and Neuroticism would be,

respectively, positively and negatively correlated with happiness (H1 and

H2), as found by many other studies (e.g., Furnham & Cheng, 1999;

Furnham & Petrides, 2004; Hayes & Jopseph, 2003; Hills & Argyle,

1998). These findings were confirmed. Extraversion correlated at .54

with happiness, an even stronger correlation than the one found by

Furnham and Petrides (2003; r = .33). In this study Extraversion alone

accounted for a significant amount of the variance in the OHI (30%),

which makes it a strong predictor of happiness. Many factors may be

involved in explaining the apparent happiness of extraverts. Extraverted

people are more involved with people and have a larger circle of friends.

They more often engage in rewarding social activities, experience more

affection, and enjoy greater social support, an important wellspring of

well-being. Argyle et al. (1989) showed that the happiness of extraverts

is partly due to the joy of social interaction with friends, which extraverts

are able to enjoy more, possibly because they have superior social skills

than introverts. Headey et al. (1985) found in a longitudinal panel study

that Extraversion predisposed people to have favourable life events,

especially in the domains of work and leisure. This can be done by

choosing to enter such events, or by being able to change events once

they are in them. The fact that life appears to treat extraverts more kindly

could be due to their tendency to be more accepting of themselves and

more confident that others will like them, such attitudes becoming self-

fulfilling and leading them to experience more positive events.

As expected, Neuroticism was negatively correlated with happiness at

r = -.39, similar to the correlation found by Petrides and Furnham (r = -

.37). Individuals high in Neuroticism (self-reported “emotionality”)

report themselves as moody, nervous, easily stressed, and sensitive,

while low scorers profess stability, confidence, poise, and emotional self-

control. They have the tendency to swing easily into the four general

dysphoric mood-states of depression, anxiety, fatigue/boredom, and

hostility. It follows that since the absence of negative affect such as

anxiety and depression is one of the main components of happiness, In a

recent Norwegian study, examining personality correlates of happiness

through structural Equation Modeling, Vitterso and Nibson (2004) found

Neuroticism eight times as much variance as extraversion. The negative

affect associated with Neuroticism seems a very powerful predictor of

unhappiness.

The Psychoticism scale on the EPQ, which measures tough-

mindedness, was found to have a modest negative correlation with

happiness (r = -.10). This, too, is in line with previous findings, although

Hills and Argyle (2001) found a slightly stronger negative correlation (r

= -.27).


Furthermore, it was hypothesized (H3) that, as shown by Furnham

and Petrides (2003), trait EI (or “emotional self-efficacy”) would be a

strong positive predictor of happiness. This hypothesis was confirmed.

Trait EI correlated positively with happiness at r = .60. (Furnham and

Petrides found it correlated at r = .70). Trait EI alone explained a great

deal of the variability in happiness (36%), while personality alone

accounted for 37% of total variance. This relationship remained

statistically significant even after controlling for the effects of

personality, showing that trait EI has incremental validity over the basic

personality dimensions. Trait EI is conceptually and empirically related

to happiness and well-being (Palmer, Donaldson, & Stough, 2002;

Saklofske et al., 2003). Individuals with high trait EI are more flexible,

aware of their own and other peoples’ feelings, capable of

communicating their feelings to others, influencing other people’s

feelings, and controlling their own emotions. They are supposedly

capable of withstanding pressure and regulating stress, cheerful and

satisfied with their lives, and confident and likely to “look on the bright

side” of life. No doubt it is the management of one’s own and others’

emotions that is the really important component of EI that relates to

happiness. This study demonstrated that, at the very least, trait EI is a

salient component of well-being, just as important as personality.

Critics may point to the possibility that high EI – happiness

correlations are due, at least in part, to item overlap. Certainly such

things as successful emotional regulation seem core to both concepts.

Inspection of the items does suggest that they are sampling from different

domains. Nevertheless, it would be desirable to have additional

validation of this relationship using something other than self-report

(perhaps observational) data.

Concerning Morris’ happiness types, an inspection of the mean

ratings revealed that participants thought the most important happiness

types were target, cooperative, and genetic (means between 5 and 6).

Sensual, cerebral, rhythmic, comic, accidental, and competitive

happiness were reported by participants to be important in their lives

(means between 4 and 5). Of moderate significance were tranquil,

devout, fantasy, selective, and negative happiness (means between 3 and

4). Participants reported experiencing little dangerous happiness (mean

between 2 and 3), while painful and chemical happiness were reported

the least (means between 1 and 2). Thus anticipating new experiences

and challenges, helping others, experiencing deep interpersonal

relationships (whether with a partner or family members), and caring

deeply for those in such relationships were participants’ main sources of

happiness, as reported in the MMHI. Participants’ report that anticipating

new experiences and challenges and striving to reach a goal was the


greater source of pleasure is consistent with the earlier conclusions of

some psychologists.

Collectively, Morris’ happiness types were not predictive of self-

reported trait happiness as measured by the OHI. Adding the six factors

obtained from Morris’ happiness types to a model containing trait EI and

personality did not significantly improve the prediction of happiness.

This is probably because aspects of personality such as Extraversion and

trait EI overlapped with many of Morris’ types (such as target

happiness), so Morris’ happiness types became redundant in accounting

for the variability in OHI scores.

External variables such as age, sex, education, marital status, work,

annual income, and religion were not found to be reliable predictors of

the OHI. This could be partly due to the nature of this sample. However,

the findings are in line with conclusions previously reached by some

researchers (e.g., Diener et al., 1999) that personality is a greater

determinant of happiness than social class, money, social relationships,

work, religion, or other external variables.

Happiness in work was significantly associated with overall

happiness (OHI). Most people in the modern world work, and since the

majority of people work for 7-8 hours or more a day, it is very likely that

satisfaction with work and with life as a whole will be related. One

theory about the relation between satisfaction with work and with other

areas of life is the “spillover hypothesis,” predicting that satisfaction with

family affects job satisfaction and vice versa. Another possibility is that

work and non-work have much in common, such as friendship, status,

and personality, so that both are closely linked to satisfaction with life as

a whole (Near et al., 1980). This is the top-down part of the relation, but

there is also a bottom-up part, in which satisfaction with work has some

effect on overall satisfaction.

As hypothesized (H4), Competitive happiness was found to be

significantly predicted by trait EI (accounting for 9% of the variance

alone), and this relationship persisted even in the presence of personality.

Aspects of trait EI such as emotion regulation, relationship skills, and

social competence (Petrides & Furnham, 2001) do appear to be more

prevalent in individuals who tend to derive much happiness from

competition (and/or cooperation) with other people (labelled

Interpersonal happiness).

It was hypothesized (H5) that Extraversion would be the best

predictor of dangerous, target, rhythmic, sensual, and cerebral happiness.

This was indeed the case, with Extraversion being the best predictor by

far, accounting for 20% of the total variance in these happiness types

combined, while trait EI accounted for only 8%. Furthermore, adding

trait EI or the OHI did not significantly improve prediction of this


variable. Apparently, certain facets of extraversion, such as sensation

seeking, sensitivity to reward signals, achievement seeking, and thrill and

adventure seeking, are connected to these happiness types. Thus,

Extraversion appears to be a trait individuals are more likely to possess if

they derive happiness from experiencing primary biological pleasures

(sensual happiness), carrying out acts of intelligence that lead to a sense

of achievement (cerebral happiness), striving to reach a goal (target

happiness), engaging in risky activities that provide a sense of thrill and

adventure (dangerous happiness), or seeking sensation through activities

like music, dancing, and singing (rhythmic happiness).

It was hypothesized (H6) that negative and chemical happiness would

be best predicted by Neuroticism because of the previously documented

association between high Neuroticism and certain kinds of

psychopathology and drug use (Lodhi & Thakur, 1993; Schmitz et al.

2003; Terracciano & Costa, 2004). This hypothesis was not supported by

the data. Participants may have been reluctant to report the true extent to

which they enjoy these negative happiness types that are more likely to

be regarded as less acceptable by others and perhaps by themselves. The

Lie scale was significantly associated with these happiness types, where

participants scoring high on the Lie scale tended to report deriving less

pleasure from chemical and negative happiness. This adds further support

to the possibility that low scorers in Negative happiness may have been

simply being dishonest. Even though Neuroticism alone was not a

significant predictor, as would be expected, Negative happiness

correlated positively with both Psychoticism and Neuroticism and

negatively with happiness as measured by the OHI and trait EI.

Finally, it was hypothesized (H7) that tranquil and devout happiness

would be best predicted by participants’ degree of religiousness based on

Morris’ descriptions about what constitutes these happiness types.

Religiousness was by far the strongest predictor of Spiritual happiness,

accounting for 17% of the total variance, while personality alone

accounted for 6% of the total variance and trait EI for 1%. For many

people, faith provides a support community in times of crisis, a reason to

focus beyond the self, and a sense of purpose and hope. However, it is

important to note that although Spiritual happiness is predicted by

religiousness, overall happiness as measured by the OHI, is not. Thus,

religiousness does not appear to be adequate in order for individuals to be

satisfied with all aspects of their lives.

Demographic variables did not emerge from this study as important

predictors of Morris’ happiness types. Age, however, was significantly

related with some of Morris’ happiness types. Both Sensation seeking

and Negative Happiness were negatively correlated with age. Naturally,


young people gained more pleasure from adventurous, sensation seeking

activities and greater drug-induced pleasure.

This study has demonstrated that, in general, trait EI and Extraversion

are the two most important predictors of self-reported happiness, both as

measured by the OHI and the ratings of Morris’ different happiness

types. In fact, the two happiness types participants reported as most

important for them, namely target and cooperative happiness, were

reliably associated with Extraversion and trait EI, respectively. For two

of the clusters of happiness types examined (Interpersonal happiness &

Sensation seeking), trait EI and Extraversion, respectively, were the most

significant predictors. However, this study also showed that other factors

can be important in gaining pleasure from some aspect of one’s life. This

is demonstrated by the fact that religiousness, and not trait EI or

Extraversion, appears to be the most significant predictor of Morris’

Spiritual happiness.

The fact that individuals high in trait EI and high in Extraversion tend

to be more satisfied with their lives on the whole (OHI) or are able to

gain pleasure from a wider range of events and activities (most of

Morris’ happiness types) does not mean there is no hope for introverts

and people low in trait EI.

Inevitably, this is something of a pilot study, given that it appears

that, as yet, there is no other published research examining the ideas of

Morris. This study has, like all others, various shortcomings. The sample

was modest and ideally would have been larger. The measure of the

Morris happiness types was based on a single-item measure. There is

concern about item overlap of EI measures and happiness measures.

However, this study provides, hopefully, a useful first step to investigate

the idea that happiness is not always best treated as a unitary concept as

there may well be different, identifiable, and stable measures of different

types of trait and state happiness.

REFERENCES Argyle, M. (1992). Benefits produced by supportive social relationships. In H. O.

F. Veiel & U. Baumann (Eds.), The meaning and measurement of social

support. New York: Hemisphere publishing.

Argyle, M. (1994). The psychology of social class. London: Routledge.

Argyle, M. (2001). The psychology of happiness. London: Routledge.

Argyle, M., & Lu, L. (1990). The happiness of extroverts. Personality and

Individual Differences, 11, 1011-1017.

Argyle, M., Martin, M., & Crossland, J. (1989). Happiness as a function of

personality and social encounters. In J. P. Forgas & J. M. Innes (Eds.), Recent

advances in social psychology: An international perspective. North Holland:

Elsevier.

Brebner, J. (1998). Happiness and personality. Personality and Individual

Differences, 25, 279-296.


Chamorro-Premuzic, R., Bennett, E., & Furnham, A. (2007). The happy

personality: mediating role of trait emotional intelligence. Personality and

Individual Differences, 8, 1633 – 1639.

Cheng, H., & Furnham, A. (2003). Personality, self-esteem, and demographic

predictions of happiness and depression. Personality and Individual


Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond boredom and anxiety. San Fransisco:

Jossey-Bass.

Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542-575.

Diener, E., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2000). Income and subjective well-being: will

money make us happy? University of Illinois, unpublished.

Diener, E., & Larsen, R, J. (1984). Temporal stability and cross-situational

consistency of affective, behavioural, and cognitive responses. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 580-592.

Diener, E., & Lucas, R. (1999). Personality and subjective well-being. In D.

Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Foundations of Hedonic

Psychology (pp. 213-229). New York: Russell Sage.

Diener, E., Suh, E., Lucas, R., & Smith, H. (1999). Subjective well-being: three

decades of progress. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 276-302.

Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1975). Manual of the Eysenck Personality

Questionnaire. London Hodder & Stoughton.

Eysenck, H. J. (1983). I do: your guide to a happy marriage. London: Century.

Eysenck, M. (1990). Happiness: Facts and myths. Hove: LEA.

Francis, L. (1999). Happiness is a thing called stable extraversion. Personality

and Individual Differences, 26, 5-11.

Francis, L., Brown, L., Lester, D., & Philipchalk, R. (1998). Happiness is stable

extraversion. Personality and Individual Differences, 24, 167 – 171.

Furnham, A. (1981) Personality and activity preference. British Journal of Social

Psychology, 20, 57-68.

Furnham, A., & Brewin, C. (1990). Personality and happiness. Personality and

Individual Differences, 11, 1093-1096.

Furnham, A. & Cheng, H. (1999). Personality as predictor of mental health and

happiness in the East and West. Personality and Individual Differences, 27,

395-403.

Furnham, A., & Petrides, K. V. (2003). Trait emotional intelligene and happiness.

Social Behaviour and Personality, 31, 815-824.

Furnham, A., Cheng, H., & Shirasu, Y. (2001). Lay theories of happiness in the

east and west. Psychologia, 44, 173-187.

Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence Reframed. New York: Free Press.

Gray, J. A. (1981). A critique of Eysenck's theory of personality. In H. J. Eysenck

(Ed.), A model for personality (pp. 246-277). Berlin: Springer.

Hayes, N., & Joseph, S. (2003). Big Five correlates of three measures of

subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 723-727.

Headey, B. W., Holmstrom, E. L., & Wearing, A. J. (1985). Models of well-being

and ill-being. Social Indicators Research, 17, 211-234.

Hills, P., & Argyle, M. (1998b). Positive moods derived from leisure and their

relationship to happiness and personality. Personality and Individual



Hills, P., & Argyle, M. (2001). Happiness, introversion-extraversion and happy

introverts. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 595-608.

Larsen, R. J., & Ketelaar, T. (1991). Personality and susceptibility to positive and

negative emotional states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

61,132-140.

Lodhi, P. H., & Thakur (1993). Personality of drug addicts: Eysenckian analysis.

Personality and Individual Differences, 15(2), 121-128.

Lykken, D., & Tellegen, A. (1996). Happiness is a stochastic phenomenon.

Psychological Science, 7, 186-189.

Maletasta, C. Z., Grigoryev, P., Lamb, C., Albin, M., & Culver, C. (1986).

Emotion socialization and expressive development in preterm and full-term

infants. Child Development, 57, 316-330.

Morris, D. (2004). The nature of happiness. London: Little Books Ltd.

Myers, D. (1992). The pursuit of happiness. New York: Avon Books.

Myers , D., & Diener, E. (1995). Who is happy? Psychological Science, 6, 10-19.

Near, J. P., Smith, C., Rice, R. W., & Hunt, R. G. (1980). The relationship

between work and nonwork domains. Academy of Management Review, 5,

415-429.

Palmer, B., Donaldson, C., & Stough, C. (2002). Emotional intelligence and life

satisfaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 1091-1100.

Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2001). Trait emotional intelligence:

Psychometric investigation with reference to established trait taxonomies.

European Journal of Personality, 15, 425-448.

Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2003). Trait emotional intelligence: Behavioral

validations in two studies of emotion, recognition and reactivity to mood

induction. European Journal of Personality, 17, 39-57.

Petrides, K. V., Perez, J. C., & Furnham, A. (2003): The Trait Emotional

Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue). A measure of emotional self-efficacy.

In E. J. Austin & D. H. Saklofske (Chairs), Emotional Intelligence.

Symposium conducted at the 11th Biennial Meeting of the International

Society for the Study of the Individual Differences. Graz, Austria.

Saklofske, D., Austin, E., & Minski, P. (2003). Factor structure and validity of a

trait emotional intelligence measure. Personality and Individual Differences,

34, 707-721.

Schmitz, N., Kugler, J. & Rollnik, J. (2003). On the relation Between

Neuroticism, Self-Esteem, and Depression. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 44(3),

169-176.

Seligman, M.E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology.

American Psychologist, 55, 5-14.

Terracciano A., & Costa, P.T.(2004). Smoking and the Five-Factor Model of

personality. Addiction. 99(4), 472-481.

Vitterso, J., & Nilsen, F. (2004). The conceptual and relational structure of

subjective well-being, neuroticism and extraversion. Social Indicators

Research, 57, 89-118.

Personality Traits, Emotional Intelligence, and Multiple Happiness

Documents

Transcript of Personality Traits, Emotional Intelligence, and Multiple Happiness