Please create 3 Power Point Slides

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

e worrying about things they might have done. They aren’t perfect, but they respect and feel good about themselves for what they are.

Psychologically healthy people also are less restricted by cultural norms and customs than the average person. They express their thoughts and desires in a way that suits them, regardless of whether society approves. Self-actualized individuals often dress differently, live differently, and spend their free time differently than most people. It’s not that they’re insensitive to or unaware of social rules and societal expectations. On the contrary, Maslow described them as very perceptive. They understand how they are “supposed” to act; they simply feel little need to structure their lives like everyone else’s.

Maslow was surprised to find that every psychologically healthy person he studied was in some way quite creative. But not all expressed their creativity through traditional outlets like poetry or painting. Rather, they often exhibited novel approaches to routine tasks, what Maslow called self-actualizing creativity. A self-actualized teacher might develop innovative ways to communicate ideas to students. A self-actualized businessperson might think of clever new approaches to improve sales.

People are often surprised to learn that self-actualized individuals have relatively few friends. However, the friendships they do have are deep and rewarding. Self-actualized people also have a “philosophical, unhostile” sense of humor. They poke fun at the human condition and at themselves but do not make fun of specific individuals or groups. Self-actualized people also have a strong need for solitude, as we’ll explore in the next chapter.

Perhaps the most intriguing characteristic Maslow discovered in psychologically healthy people is the tendency to have peak experiences. During a peak experience, time and place are transcended. Anxieties and fears are replaced by a sense of unity with the universe and a momentary feeling of power and wonder. However, peak experiences are different for each person. Maslow likened them to “a visit to a personally defined Heaven.” Above all else, they are growth experiences. Often problems that concerned people before a peak experience no longer seem as important afterward. However, not all self-actualized people have peak experiences, and people who fall short of self-actualization may on occasion experience them.

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF OPTIMAL EXPERIENCE

LO 11.4 Describe optimal experience and how it relates to happiness.

What makes people happy? This question threads its way through much of the writings of the humanistic personality theorists. Of course, most of us point to family and friends as important sources of happiness. But what sorts of activities make us happy? That is, to increase our sense of well-being and contentment, how should we spend our time? Psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (pronounced Chick-Sent-Me-High) has one suggestion. He maintains that opportunities for happiness can be found in many of the everyday, otherwise routine activities that fill our lives.

Optimal Experience

Csikszentmihalyi (1990, 1999) began his exploration on the causes of happiness by simply asking people to describe the activities that make them happy. Try it yourself. Think of a time when you felt alive and totally engaged in an activity, when what you were doing was more than pleasurable, but truly enjoyable. Csikszentmihalyi’s participants identified a wide variety of experiences that fit this description. Some people talked about mountain climbing, others about playing tennis, others about performing surgery. But when he asked people to describe the experience in their own words, he found they used surprisingly similar terms.

Csikszentmihalyi’s participants talked about becoming so involved in what they were doing that nothing else seemed to matter. Whether it was exploring an underwater cave or playing a concerto, the activity demanded all their attention. Although each step seemed to flow automatically to the next, the task was almost always challenging and demanded full concentration. Reaching their goal provided participants with a sense of mastery, but the real pleasure came from the process rather than the achievement (Csikszentmihalyi et al., 2018; Fong et al., 2015)

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

Csikszentmihalyi refers to these kinds of moments as optimal experience. Because people typically describe a feeling of being caught up in a natural, almost effortless movement from one step to the next, psychologists sometimes refers to the experience as flow. Optimal experiences are intensely enjoyable, but they usually are not restful, relaxing moments. On the contrary, most flow experiences are quite demanding (Abuhamdeh & Csikszentmihalyi, 2012; de Manzano et al., 2010). As Csikszentmihalyi (1990) put it, “the best moments usually occur when a person’s body or mind is stretched to its limits in a voluntary effort to accomplish something difficult and worthwhile” (p. 3).

Interestingly, people of all ages and cultures tend to describe the flow experience in similar terms. After examining thousands of descriptions of people’s most satisfying and enjoyable moments, Csikszentmihalyi (1990) identified eight characteristics that make up the flow experience (Table 11.1). Not every optimal experience contains each of these eight, but any flow experience you can think of probably includes many of these components.

Table 11.1

1. The Activity Is Challenging and Requires Skill.

The task is sufficiently challenging to demand full attention, but not so difficult that it denies a sense of accomplishment.

2. One’s Attention Is Completely Absorbed by the Activity.

People stop being aware of themselves as separate from their actions, which seem spontaneous and automatic.

3. The Activity Has Clear Goals.

There is a direction, a logical point to work toward.

4. There Is Clear Feedback.

We need to know if we have succeeded at reaching our goal, even if this is only self- confirmation.

5. One Can Concentrate Only on the Task at Hand.

During flow, we pay no attention to the unpleasant parts of life.

�. One Achieves a Sense of Personal Control.

People in flow enjoy the experience of exercising control over their environment.

7. One Loses Self-Consciousness.

With attention focused on the activity and the goals, there is little opportunity to think about one’s self.

�. One Loses a Sense of Time.

Usually hours pass by in what seems like minutes, but the opposite can also occur.

Finding Happiness in Everyday Activities

In a perfect world, we all could enjoy life to its fullest by doing what we wanted when we wanted and filling our lives with one flow activity after another. But reality does not grant such luxury. Most of us face a seemingly endless series of demands, with free time an increasingly rare commodity. This observation raises an important question: When are people more likely to experience flow—at work or during leisure hours? Of course, people often have flow-like experiences when engaging in recreational activities like playing a musical instrument or competing in sports (Stein et al., 1995). However, researchers find that flow experiences are far more likely to happen when people are at work than during off-hours (Csikszentmihalyi & LeFevre, 1989). A challenging job creates numerous opportunities to experience a sense of mastery and accomplishment (Keller & Bless, 2008). Moreover, finding happiness in our work is not limited to glamorous professions or even to paid positions. Mowing the lawn or making dinner can be a source of happiness, if we look at these chores as challenges and take pride and satisfaction in a job well done. Rather than thinking of every job as something we have to do or something others expect us to do, we can approach daily tasks by asking what we can get out of them.

This advice also applies to educational settings (Schmidt et al., 2007). Students are most content with their academic experiences when they face assignments that are challenging but still within their power to accomplish (Moneta & Csikszentmihalyi, 1996). Researchers in one

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

study identified students who typically were motivated to work hard not by a grade but because they found learning the material to be fascinating and satisfying (Wong & Csikszentmihalyi, 1991). Interestingly, these students’ grades were not particularly high. But they did take more advanced courses than grade-driven students, probably because they wanted to learn more about the subjects they found interesting. Intrinsically motivated undergraduates in another study were more likely to lose track of time and to report that study time passed more quickly than did students who were less interested in the learning experience (Conti, 2001).

In summary, Csikszentmihalyi’s prescription for happiness contains many of the elements traditionally embraced by humanistic personality psychology. Flow experiences require us to live in the present and to get the most out of our lives in the here and now. Achieving the goal is not the point. Rather, it is the struggle and experience along the way that provide the enjoyment. Moreover, happiness comes from taking control of our own lives rather than caving in to conventional standards or demands from others. In the flow state, people are intensely in touch with their experiences and often feel a sense of personal mastery. Like the peak experiences Maslow described, flow experiences are occasions for personal growth.

APPLICATION: PERSON-CENTERED THERAPY

LO 11.5 Describe the key features of Rogers’ person-centered approach to psychotherapy.

Carl Rogers’ approach to counseling presents an interesting challenge for humanistic psychotherapists. According to Rogers, a therapist cannot possibly understand clients as well as clients understand themselves. He also maintained that clients, rather than the therapist, are responsible for changing themselves. So, what is left for therapists to do when people come to them for help? Rogers’ answer was that the therapist provides an atmosphere within which clients are able to help themselves. He called this approach person-centered therapy.

Rogers believed each individual naturally grows in a positive, self-actualizing direction unless that person’s progress is in some way impeded. The therapist simply allows the client to get back on the positive-growth path. After successful Rogerian therapy, clients should be more open to personal experience, more able to accept all aspects of themselves, and therefore less likely to use defenses when encountering information that threatens their self-concept. In short, they should be more fully functioning and happier people.

But how is this accomplished? Therapists must first create the proper relationship with their clients. The most important rule here is to be open and genuine. Therapists should be themselves rather than play the role of therapist they were taught in graduate school. This means being honest with clients, even if that includes being very frank (but not cruel) at times. Rogers believed clients can always tell when a therapist isn’t being genuine with them, and the mistrust that comes from this perception can doom a therapeutic relationship.

The proper therapeutic relationship also requires unconditional positive regard from the therapist, something many clients have been denied elsewhere in their lives. Clients must feel free to express and accept all their thoughts and feelings during therapy without fear of rejection from the therapist. Unconditional positive regard does not mean therapists must approve of everything clients say and do. Indeed, in the safe atmosphere provided by the therapist, clients may disclose some disturbing information about themselves. But because therapists accept clients with positive regard despite these faults and weaknesses, clients learn to acknowledge—and eventually change— these aspects of themselves.

In addition to providing an accepting relationship, therapists can help clients understand their own thoughts and feelings through a process of reflection. Rather than interpret what clients really mean, as a Freudian therapist might, a Rogerian therapist helps clients listen to what they are saying. Part of this process is simply giving clients the opportunity to put their feelings into words. By translating vague feelings into precise words, clients come to understand their feelings. Clients listen to own their words and examine their thoughts, perhaps for the first time. One technique a therapist can use to further this process is to restate what the client says. Some people mistakenly think this means the therapist simply repeats the client’s words verbatim. But as the following excerpt demonstrates, the goal is to help clients explore their thoughts and feelings by directing their attention to what they are saying. In this example, Rogers is working with a woman who is struggling with her sense of personal identity:

Client [C]: I suppose I want to know just what to do, but then maybe nobody could give me that.

Therapist [T]: You realize that you are probably looking for immediate answers that nobody could give you.

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

C: I just don’t know. I don’t know what I’m looking for. It’s just that I wonder if I’m insane sometimes. I think I’m nuts.

T: It just gives you concern that you’re as far from normal as you feel you are.

C: That’s right. It’s silly to tell me not to worry because I do worry. It’s my life. … Well, I don’t know how I can change my concept of myself—because that’s the way I feel.

T: You feel very different from others and you don’t see how you can fix that.

C: I realize, of course, that it all began a long time ago—because everything begins somewhere. I wasn’t just—somehow or other something failed somewhere along the line. And I guess we sort of have to get at it, a sort of reeducation. But I don’t feel as though I can do it myself.

T: You realize that the roots must go a long way back, and that at some point you will have to start in reworking it, but you’re not sure whether you can do it.

C: That’s right. It’s just the idea that I can see myself going through life this way, 50-, 60-, and 70- years-old—still thinking these horrible thoughts. And it just doesn’t seem worthwhile—I mean, it’s so ridiculous. While everybody else is going their way and living life, I’m sort of at the edge, and looking on. It just isn’t right.

T: The future doesn’t look very bright when you look at it that way.

C: No. I know I’m lacking in courage, that’s the big thing I’m lacking. That must be it, ’cause other people aren’t swayed so easily. … It’s a hard thing to explain these things. It’s just as though—it’s—true but I laugh at it in a way. … It’s a very confused feeling.

T: Logically, you realize that courage is one of your deficiencies, but inside yourself you find yourself laughing at that notion and feeling that it doesn’t really have anything to do with you. Is that it?

C: That’s right. I always sort of make myself different. That’s it. (1947, pp. 138–140)

Therapists never tell clients what the client really means to say. Instead, therapists restate what they believe they are hearing. However, these restatements are only suggestions for the client to agree with or reject. If the process is effective, clients come to see themselves as others do and eventually accept or modify what they see. Clients may come to understand they have been distorting or denying parts of their experiences. A man may realize he has been trying to live up to his father’s impossibly high expectations, or a woman may come to understand she is afraid to commit to a serious relationship. In the freedom provided by the therapist’s unconditional support, clients peel away their defenses, accept who they are, and begin to appreciate all of life’s experiences.

Today a large number of psychotherapists identify their approach as humanistic (Cook et al., 2010; Jaimes et al., 2015; Kalogeropoulos et al., 2018), and many others include aspects of person-centered therapy in their work (Miller & Moyers, 2017). Reviews of empirical studies find considerable evidence for the effectiveness of humanistic psychotherapy and for approaches to therapy that focus on humanistic concepts like finding meaning in one’s life (Angus et al., 2015; Elliott, 2002; Vohs et al., 2015). Not only do many clients benefit from the person- centered approach, but the effects of the treatment can often be seen many months after the therapy sessions end.

ASSESSMENT: THE Q-SORT TECHNIQUE

LO 11.6 Discuss how the Q-Sort technique can be used to measure change during psychotherapy.

A persistent challenge for psychotherapists of all stripes is to demonstrate the effectiveness of their treatment. Carl Rogers was very aware of this challenge and strongly encouraged research on the effectiveness of person-centered psychotherapy. Too often therapy is declared a success simply because the therapist and client feel there has been improvement. However, without empirical evidence of therapeutic change, Rogers argued, psychologists are in danger of fooling themselves.

So how can a humanistic psychologist demonstrate that clients are more fully functioning or closer to self-actualization after a few months of therapy? One tool that has proven useful is a procedure called the Q-Sort. The basic procedure was developed several decades ago (Stephenson, 1953) and has been used to assess a wide variety of psychological concepts, including parent–child attachment (Tarabulsky et al., 2008), defense mechanisms (Davidson &

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

MacGregor, 1996), temperament (Buckley et al., 2002), and strength of romantic relationships (Bengston & Grotevant, 1999). Rogers saw the procedure also fit nicely with his approach to psychotherapy and quickly adopted it.

The California Q-Sort (Block, 2008) is a good example of a Q-Sort procedure used by many humanistic therapists. The materials for this test consist of a deck of 100 cards. A self- descriptive phrase is printed on each card, such as “is a talkative individual,” “seeks reassurance from others,” or “has high aspiration level for self.”

If you were a client about to begin counseling with a Rogerian therapist, you might be instructed to read the cards and sort them into categories. On the first sort, you would be asked to place the cards into nine categories according to how much you believe the description on the card applies to you. The nine categories represent points on a normal distribution (Figure 11.2), with the categories on the extreme ends representing characteristics most descriptive of you (Category 9) and least descriptive of you (Category 1).

Description

Figure 11.2 Distribution of Cards on Block’s Q-Sort

Let’s suppose the description on the first card is “is a talkative individual.” If this phrase describes you very well, you would place the card in Category 9 or 8. If you think you are a very quiet person, you might put the card in Category 1 or 2. A key difference between the Q-Sort and other assessment procedures is the Q-Sort sets limits on how many cards can be placed in each category. Indecisive test takers are forced, for example, to select only a few cards that are most descriptive of them. When all the cards are sorted, you have a neatly arranged profile of your self-concept.

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

After recording which cards you placed into which categories, you would then be asked to shuffle the deck and take the test again. However, this time you would distribute the cards according to your “ideal” self. Thus, if “is a talkative individual” does not describe you very well, but you want to become more talkative, you would move this card to a higher category than you used during the first sort. After you have laid out descriptions of your “real” and “ideal” selves, you and the therapist can compare the two profiles.

The Q-Sort technique fits very nicely with Rogers’ theory for several reasons. Consistent with Rogers’ assumption that clients know themselves best, clients are allowed to describe themselves however they please. Of course, a therapist will not always agree with a client’s placement of the cards. A client might describe herself as socially aware, polite, and sensitive to the needs of others when a perceptive therapist sees right away that her crude insensitivity may be part of her problem. The task for the therapist in this case is to help the client come to see herself in a more realistic light.

By assigning each card a number from 1 to 9 according to its category, we can compute a correlation coefficient (Chapter 2) between a client’s real self and that person’s ideal self. For a psychologically healthy person, the two should be very similar. If category values are identical for both profiles, a perfect 1.0 correlation would be obtained, although it is difficult to imagine people being just like their ideal selves in every way. The further the correlation is from 1.0, the less accepting people are of themselves and, using Rogers’ term, the less fully functioning. Clients whose real and ideal selves are completely unrelated would have a zero correlation. Clients’ profiles can also be negatively correlated if their real and ideal selves are at opposite sides of the distribution on many of the descriptions. Consistent with Rogers’ assumption, researchers find a high correlation between a person’s real and ideal self is related to positive well-being (Gough et al., 1983; Gough et al., 1978).

Other studies find that real- and ideal-self correlations increase as clients move through client- centered psychotherapy (Butler, 1968). To illustrate how the Q-Sort can be used to track therapeutic progress, let’s look at one of Rogers’ clients (Rogers, 1961). This 40-year-old woman came to Rogers with problems that included an unhappy marriage and guilt about her daughter’s psychological problems. The woman attended 40 therapy sessions over the course of 5 1/2 months and returned a few months later for some additional sessions. She completed the real- and ideal-self Q-Sorts at the beginning and at various stages during her treatment. She also completed the Q-Sort at two follow-up sessions, 7 and 12 months after her therapy. The correlations among the various Q-Sorts are presented in Figure 11.3.

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

Description

Figure 11.3 Changing Real and Ideal Self Q-Sorts for a 40-Year-Old Female Client

Source: From Rogers, C., June 1955; vol. 1: pp. 31–41, Copyright © 1955. Reprinted by Permission of SAGE.

Several important changes in the way the woman viewed her real self and her ideal self occurred during her treatment. The similarity between the two sorts increased significantly over the course of the therapy and continued to grow even after she discontinued the sessions. At the beginning of her treatment, her real- and ideal-self Q-Sorts were quite discrepant, correlating at only .21. In other words, when she first entered Carl Rogers’ office, she did not see herself at all as the kind of person she wanted to be. However, as therapy progressed, the two descriptions became more and more alike. In particular, the client changed the way she viewed herself. We can tell this from the low correlation (.30) between the way she described herself at the beginning of the therapy and the way she described herself at the end. By exploring her feelings in these person-centered sessions, the client came to see herself in very different and presumably more accurate terms.

STRENGTHS AND CRITICISMS OF THE HUMANISTIC APPROACH

LO 11.7 Describe some of the strengths and criticisms of the humanistic approach.

The humanistic movement hit psychology like a storm in the 1960s. Therapists from every perspective were converted to the person-centered approach, and humanistic-oriented encounter groups and workshops sprang up everywhere. Then, almost as quickly as it arrived, the third force movement seemed to fade in the late 1970s. Many converts became

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

disenchanted, some humanistic-oriented programs in education and the workplace were declared failures, and the number of popular paperbacks capitalizing on the movement dwindled. But, also like a storm, the humanistic approach to personality left reminders of its presence. Today a large number of practicing psychotherapists identify themselves as humanistic in their orientation, and many others have adopted various Rogerian techniques in their practice. Humanistic psychologists enjoy an active division in the American Psychological Association and publish their own journal. Although the movement never replaced the well-entrenched psychoanalytic or behavioral approaches, it remains an appealing alternative for many people inside and outside of the discipline. This ebb and flow of popularity suggests the humanistic approach, like other approaches to personality, has both strengths and reasons for criticism.

Strengths

Because personality theorists often dwell on psychological problems, the humanists’ positive approach offers a welcome alternative. The writings of Rogers and Maslow remain popular with each new generation of students. One enduring contribution of humanistic psychology is its emphasis on the healthy side of personality. Recently we have seen a huge interest in what is called positive psychology (Jankowski et al., 2020; Lopez, 2009). That is, an increasing number of researchers are turning their attention to such topics as creativity, happiness, and sense of well-being.

Not surprisingly, humanistic psychology has had a huge impact on the way psychologists and counselors approach therapy. Many therapists today identify themselves as “humanistic.” More important, several aspects of the humanistic approach to therapy have been adopted or modified in some form by a large number of therapists from other theoretical perspectives. Many therapists embrace Rogers’ suggestion to make their clients the center of therapy. In addition, many therapists include in their practices such Rogerian techniques as therapist empathy, positive regard for clients, giving clients responsibility for change, and self-disclosure by client and therapist.

Humanistic psychology’s influence has not been limited to psychology and psychotherapy. Students in education, communication, and business are often introduced to Rogers’ and Maslow’s writings. Many employers and organizational psychologists are concerned about promoting job satisfaction by taking care of employees’ higher needs. And many teachers and parents have adopted or modified some of Rogers’ suggestions for education and child rearing. Because they focus on issues many of us address in our lives—fulfilling personal potential, living in the here and now, finding happiness and meaning—books by Maslow, Rogers, and other humanistic psychologists can still be found in popular bookstores.

Criticisms

Like all influential personality theories, the humanistic approach has its critics. One area of controversy concerns humanistic psychology’s reliance on the concept of free will to explain human behavior. Some psychologists argue this reliance renders the humanistic approach unfit for scientific study. Science relies on the notion that events are determined by other events, and psychology relies on the assumption that behavior is determined and therefore predictable. However, if we accept the idea that behavior is sometimes caused by free will, which is not subject to these laws of determination, the assumption falls apart. Because we can explain any behavior as caused by “free will,” no investigation will ever fail to support a free will interpretation.

In response to this criticism, humanistic psychologists and others have argued, whereas we may not be able to predict any specific behavior with 100% certainty, we can identify patterns that allow us to predict the likelihood that a person will act a certain way in a certain situation. Some philosophers refer to this perspective as statistical determinism. That is, people may freely make choices about how they will behave, but those choices are still based on factors scientists can often observe, measure, and perhaps manipulate. In essence, we are predicting what choices people will make. We should also point out that critics of humanistic psychology’s emphasis on free will typically do not argue that free will does not exist—only that it cannot be explored through scientific inquiry.

Another criticism of the humanistic approach is that many key concepts are poorly defined. What exactly is “self-actualization,” “fully functioning,” or “becoming”? How do we know if we’re having a “peak experience” or just a particularly pleasant time? Maslow argued we simply don’t know enough about self-actualization and personal growth to provide clear definitions. But this defense is far from satisfying for most researchers. How can we investigate self-actualization if we can’t decide who’s got it and who hasn’t? Because most psychologists are trained as

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

researchers, the inability to pin down humanistic concepts causes many to challenge the usefulness of the approach.

Some psychologists have criticized the humanistic approach for its lack of scientific rigor. Although Rogers is to be commended for his efforts to assess the effectiveness of person- centered therapy, he nonetheless often relied on intuition when developing his ideas about personality. Similarly, Maslow selected people for his list of “self-actualized” individuals based on his own subjective impressions.

Other psychologists point to the limited applicability of humanistic psychotherapy techniques. These critics argue that humanistic psychotherapy may be limited to a narrow band of problems. Creating the proper atmosphere for personal growth may be of little help to someone with an extreme psychological disorder. Similarly, reflecting on one’s values and direction in life might prove beneficial for well-educated, middle-class clients, but these questions might be irrelevant to someone from a different background.

Humanistic psychologists have also been criticized for making some overly naive assumptions about human nature. For example, most humanistic theorists assume all people are basically good. Although this is more a theological than an empirical question, many people find the premise hard to accept. Another assumption many find difficult to swallow is that each of us has a desire to fulfill some hidden potential. Maslow’s description of self-actualization implies that each individual is somehow destined to become, for example, a philosopher, a writer, or a carpenter. For Maslow, the key is discovering which of these true selves lies bottled up inside waiting to be developed. But whether this hidden self really exists in all people is questionable. The predeterministic nature of this part of Maslow’s theory also seems to contradict the general free will emphasis of the humanistic approach.

SUMMARY

LO 11.1: Describe the key elements of the humanistic approach to personality.

Although many approaches to psychotherapy have been described as humanistic, four criteria seem important for classifying a theory under this label. These criteria are an emphasis on personal responsibility, an emphasis on the here and now, focusing on the experience of the individual, and emphasizing personal growth.

LO 11.2: Identify Carl Rogers’ contributions to the humanistic approach.

Carl Rogers introduced the notion of a fully functioning person. According to his theory, we all progress toward a state of fulfillment and happiness unless derailed by life’s obstacles. People who encounter evidence that contradicts their self-concept often rely on distortion and denial to avoid anxiety. People who grow up in families that give only conditional positive regard may come to deny certain aspects of themselves. Rogers advocated the use of unconditional positive regard by parents and therapists to overcome this denial.

LO 11.3: Identify Abraham Maslow’s contributions to the humanistic approach.

Abraham Maslow introduced a hierarchy of human needs. According to this concept, people progress up the hierarchy as lower needs are satisfied. Maslow also examined psychologically healthy people. He found several characteristics typical of these self- actualized individuals, including the tendency by some to have frequent peak experiences.

LO 11.4: Describe optimal experience and how it relates to happiness.

Researchers find that people often describe the happiest and most rewarding moments in their lives in terms of a “flow” experience; that is, being caught up in a natural, almost effortless movement from one step to the next. Psychologists argue that turning one’s life into a series of challenging and absorbing tasks, what they call optimal experiences, increases happiness and personal fulfillment.

LO 11.5: Describe the key features of Rog