Positive Psychological Interventions in Counseling

Well-Being

Well-being has been researched by a variety of social scientists since the mid-1900s. This research, aimed at tapping into how individuals perceive their existence, has resulted in a multitude of ways to define and measure well-being. For quite some time, however, health and well-being had been equated to the absence of diseases, disorders, or problems. Contemporary positive psychology research suggests that well-being is not simply the absence of malfunction, rather, well-being consists of the presence of assets, strengths, and other positive attributes (Frisch, 2000; Keyes, 1998).

The two most common lines of well-being research that have focused upon well-being as the presence of something positive, versus the absence of something negative, include defining well-being in terms of positive feelings or in terms of positive functioning. More specifically, well-being that is defined by the degree of positive feelings (e.g., happiness) experienced and by one’s perceptions of his or her life overall (e.g., satisfaction) constitute the first line of research and is referred to as emotional well-being (Diener, Suh, Lucas, & Smith, 1999; Gurin, Veroff, & Feld, 1960). The second stream of well-being research specifies dimensions of positive functioning, which is experienced when one realizes his or her human potential in terms of psychological well-being (e.g., autonomy and personal growth; Jahoda, 1958; Keyes, 1998; Ryff, 1989b; Ryff & Keyes, 1995) and social well-being (e.g., social integration and social contribution; Keyes, 1998). Essentially, those who are high in terms of emotional well-being feel good about life, whereas those high in psychological and social well-being function well in life.

Subjective well-being (SWB) consists of a combination of these two broad lines of research on positive emotions and positive functioning (cf. Ryan & Deci, 2001; Waterman, 1993). Hence, those who are high in SWB report both feeling good and functioning well.

Meaning

Counseling psychologists through their historical alliance with humanistic and existential psychology have valued the construct of meaning; positive psychology joins that tradition. Rollo May, a noted humanist and existentialist, wrote that meaning in life is created through authentically experiencing the commitment to affirming oneself, having significant relationships, and broadly speaking, work. “Work can be satisfying precisely because it is part of a creative purpose larger than any particular work” (May, 1940, p. 19). May also believed personal meaning can stem from religious beliefs, because “the essence of religion is the belief that something matters—the presupposition that life has meaning” (May, 1940, pp. 19-20, emphasis added). More recently, a counseling psychologist, Michael Steger (2009), proposed a definition of meaning in life based on the literature containing two facets: purpose and comprehension. Meaning in life is defined as “the extent to which people comprehend, make sense of, or see significance in their lives, accompanied by the degree to which they perceive themselves to have a purpose, mission, or overarching aim in life” (Steger, 2009, p. 682). Purpose embodies the motivation or passion for chosen goals. The second facet represents a cognitive perspective of meaning; comprehension includes perceiving patterns, consistency, and significance in experiences. Steger argues that the definition fits with the definitions of other scholars, including the importance of coherence and order to life (e.g., Antonovsky, 1987; Reker & Wong, 1988), making sense of life through an identified meaning (e.g., Baumeister & Vohs, 2002), involvement in significant goals and purposes (e.g., Damon, Menon, & Bronk, 2003; Frankl, 1963; Ryff, 1989b), and an overall belief that life is personally significant (e.g., Yalom, 1980).

A large body of research supports the assertion of both humanistic and positive psychologists that meaning in life is beneficial. Higher meaning in life correlates with psychological and SWB, academic achievement, work adjustment, less cognitive decline, physical health, and longevity (see J. Y. Shin & Steger, 2014, for a review).

An interesting difference in humanistic and positive psychology perspectives has emerged that focuses upon the relation between meaning and happiness or positive emotion. The difference may reflect a lack of definitional clarity or perhaps a more substantial difference. Victor Frankl (1972) asserted, “The will to pleasure not only contradicts the self transcendent quality of human reality, but also defeats itself. It is the very pursuit of happiness that thwarts happiness. Happiness cannot be pursued” (p. 87). Frankl references a dissertation study that people visiting an amusement park in Vienna were more existentially frustrated than the average population of Vienna. Frankl’s assertion runs counter to more recent research that found happiness (positive emotions) predisposed people to feel that life is meaningful, and increased people’s sensitivity to the meaning relevance of situations (King, Hicks, Krull, & Del Gaiso, 2006). Perhaps if Frankl’s study of the amusement park had assessed the attendees after an enjoyable ride when they were feeling enjoyment, the responses may have differed.

The literature supports meaning in life as an important construct. The careful definition of the construct and representation in operational definitions may allow for greater understanding. For example, King et al. (2006) wondered whether meaning in life should be represented separately as an immediate (state) construct as well as a more long-term construct.

Hope

Hope has commanded a great deal of research in positive psychology. Defined as context specific, hope is the ability to think of multiple ways to reach a goal (pathways) and the motivation (agency) to use the pathways identified (Snyder, 2002). Hope theory is based on the assumption that people are goal directed, and the goals that are generated require cognition (Snyder, 1994).

The multiple pathways or possible routes to achieving a goal are typically accompanied by internal affirming thoughts (e.g., “I will figure out a way to do this!”). Similarly, agency involves the perceived ability to use the pathways generated to achieve a goal, which is accompanied by agentic thinking (e.g., “I can do it!”). Agency becomes particularly helpful when barriers arise (Snyder, 1994). Pathways thinking theoretically yields agency thinking—a cyclical, additive process (Snyder et al., 1991). Rather than defining hope as an emotion, Snyder’s cognitive model suggests that hope begins at birth, becoming more refined with experience. Whereas hope is considered cognitive, positive emotions result from achieving goals successfully, and negative emotions stem from unsuccessful goal attempts (Snyder, Rand, & Sigmon, 2002).

Hope is correlated with benefits across a variety of domains, including academics, athletics, work, and physical and mental health. Academically, students with high hope are more likely to experience greater academic achievement (Snyder, Cheavens, & Michael, 1999) and earn higher test scores (Snyder et al., 1997) and grade point averages (Curry, Snyder, Cook, Ruby, & Rehm, 1997). Athletes with high hope perform better than their counter low-hope competitors, even when controlling for athletic ability (Curry et al., 1997). Individuals with high hope in the work setting experience positive levels of well-being, job satisfaction, commitment, and perceived competency, as well as less stress and burnout (Reichard, Avey, Lopez, & Dollwet, 2013). In the physical health domain, individuals with high hope use information about their illness more advantageously (Snyder, Feldman, Taylor, Schroeder, & Adams, 2000). Snyder and colleagues (1991) found individuals receiving psychological services had lower hope than a college student sample. However, at-risk college students had lower hope than their peers who were not identified to be at risk (Carifio & Rhodes, 2002).

Strengths Theory

A champion of strengths, educational psychologist Donald Clifton has been viewed as a “grandfather” of positive psychology (McKay & Greengrass, 2003). Clifton stressed the importance of understanding and building from strengths while managing (rather than focusing on) weaknesses (Clifton & Nelson, 1992). Unfortunately, the strengths theory perspective is not commonly applied as can be observed by the many employers, teachers, parents, leaders, and mental health professionals who work off the following unwritten rule: “Let’s fix what’s wrong and let the strengths take care of themselves” (Clifton & Nelson, 1992, p. 9). Indeed, Gallup Polls reveal that 59% of Americans believe that a focus on weaknesses, not strengths, deserves the most attention and 77% of parents within the United States indicate that they would focus the most upon low grades such as Ds and Fs even if their child’s report card also contained As, Bs, and Cs (Buckingham & Clifton, 2000).

Clifton argued that eliminating a weakness does not create greatness for individuals or organizations; at best, only average can be achieved through removing weakness. Only through focusing on strengths while managing rather than eliminating weakness leads to excellence (Clifton & Nelson, 1992). Similarly, studying weaknesses does not lead to understanding strengths any more than studying mental illness reveals how to foster mental health.

Clifton developed measures and interviews to help people identify their talents that could then purposefully be developed into strengths. He also encouraged people to reject the popular notion that people can do anything they put their minds to. This notion suggests that anyone can be successful at anything if they are willing to work hard. This obviously is not the case, however, as all people have their own unique set of strengths that will empower them to be successful in certain areas but not others. Clifton and Nelson (1992) stated that “the reality is that we can (and should) try anything we wish to try, but long-term success will elude us unless we determine early on that we have a basic talent for the endeavor” (p. 16). Indeed, working hard to be successful in an area that fails to capitalize on one’s strengths leads to a negative view of oneself and one’s abilities.

Peterson and Seligman (2004) developed the Values in Action (VIA) Classification of Character Strengths based on similar principles to strengths theory. Under this system, 24 character strengths are thought to be the psychological ingredients necessary for displaying human goodness. Such strengths are also hypothesized to serve as pathways for developing a life of greater virtue and well-being and for helping people to have better relationships, improve health, increase happiness, boost performance, and accomplish goals.

The Broaden and Build Theory of Positive Emotions

Social Psychologist Barbara Fredrickson (1998) developed the broaden and build theory of positive emotions, which posits that positive emotions are important to our growth and our ability to flourish. She theorized that when positive emotions such as joy, interest, love, pride, and contentment occur, they lead to brief broadened thought-action repertoires, which build long-lasting personal resources. The new personal resources then increase the occurrence of positive emotion thus continuing an escalation of growth.

Research results support that positive emotions momentarily broaden thought-action repertoires, resulting in a wider range of thoughts and actions (Fredrickson & Branigan, 2005). That is, positive emotions enhance one’s ability to see more possibilities and act upon them, whereas negative emotions cause a specific action tendency such as narrow reaction of flight or fight (Frijda, 1986).

Although the experience of positive emotions is brief, the resulting broadening of thought-action repertoires has been found to build a variety of enduring personal resources (Fredrickson, 1998, 2001). Resources include psychological (i.e., creativity, optimism, and resilience), social (i.e., friendships, social skills, and support), intellectual (i.e., knowledge and problem solving), and physical assets (i.e., coordination, cardiovascular health, and muscle strength).

Fredrickson elaborates several implications of the broaden and build theory influencing areas central to psychotherapy including the undoing of negative emotions and aiding resilience against adversity (Fredrickson, 1998, 2001). Each implication is briefly described in the following sections.

Positive Empathy

Therapeutic empathy remains one of the foremost conditions for establishing the therapeutic alliance and predicting therapy outcomes (Elliott, Bohart, Watson, & Greenberg, 2011; Greenberg, Watson, Elliott, & Bohart, 2001; Wynn & Wynn, 2006). Therapeutic empathy is the therapist’s ability to sense the client’s world and share the experience with the client. From the positive psychology literature, positive empathy was developed as a sub-type of therapeutic empathy that specifically focuses upon the client’s hidden desire (Conoley & Conoley, 2009). When the hidden desire is offered back to the client for further processing, positive empathy was found to facilitate the client’s specification of approach goals, identification of strengths, and increased positive emotions (Conoley et al., 2015).

For example, a client might come to therapy due to his anxiety about grades and test taking, stating, “My friends keep me from studying. I’m going to flunk out! My parents will kill me!” An empathic response focusing upon the prominent experience (i.e., negative experience) could be “It seems like you’re feeling discouraged and perhaps hopeless because you aren’t studying because of your friends.” In contrast, a positive empathy response focusing upon a hidden desire could be “It seems like you have a deep desire to make good grades and know how to handle your friends.”

Leveraging Diagnostic Labels and Naming Strengths

Counseling psychologists are in the forefront of exploring social justice issues, including the power of labels on vulnerable populations. Using the power of the label to facilitate strengths is a worthy social justice cause, which can be guided by the positive psychology literature.

Within a therapeutic context, it seems that the most commonly used labels are diagnoses of pathology based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Although clients can find relief or a sense of validation of their problematic experiences through an accurate diagnostic label, some consider a diagnosis to be negative, especially depending upon how the label is used or applied. The application of labels to individuals often results in the creation of in- and out-groups (Wright, 1988; Wright & Lopez, 2002). Those who are labeled make up the “in-group” whereas those who do not receive the label constitute the “out-group.” People often fail to see the differences that exist among members of a labeled group, while overemphasizing the differences that exist between members of the labeled and unlabeled groups. Such deindividuation can be very harmful, as prejudices often develop via this process.

Deindividuation in therapy can occur via inappropriate use of pathology labels, resulting in dehumanization, whereby clients are seen as being equivalent to their diagnostic labels (Wright & Lopez, 2002). For instance, it is common to overhear colleagues discussing their “borderline clients.” Likewise, references to “alcoholics,” “schizophrenics,” “anorexics,” and “depressives” are typical. Such language signifies that what is most important about these clients is their pathology and that which leads to their categorization as a member of an in-group, rather than who the person is as a whole human being. Putting the client first (i.e., “a client with borderline personality disorder”) and seeing their disorder as only one aspect of who they are as a person is much more humane and sets the stage to introduce strengths theory and balanced conceptualizations of clients (for detailed information of positive psychological assessment and balanced diagnostic impressions, see Owens, Magyar-Moe, & Lopez (in press). Hence, clinicians are strongly encouraged to develop an oral and written vocabulary, in which “people first” language is consistently utilized to offset this tendency to deindividuate and dehumanize (Snyder et al., 2003).

Importantly, consistent use of people first labeling also empowers practitioners to utilize pathology labels to benefit the client and enhance hope for the future at those very moments when clients are struggling most with pathology symptoms (Magyar-Moe, 2009). For example, when a client with bipolar disorder is in a depressed phase and reports suicidal ideation and intent, practitioners who have consistently sent the message that the client is more than his or her pathology can turn to this message to essentially team up with the client to fight the disorder as if it were a third entity in the therapy room. The astute clinician can point out that the client does not want to die, rather, that the suicidal thinking is due to the bipolar disorder that the client and clinician are going to keep working together to fight. If the client has been equated to his or her disorder, this method cannot be utilized, and when one views oneself primarily as his or her pathology, hope for a better future is difficult to obtain and maintain (Magyar-Moe, 2013).

Although the power of labels can be detrimental when labeling weaknesses or deficits, especially if one is not thoughtful about how such labels are applied, the upside is that when the valence of the label is changed such that positive strengths and resources are being described, the power of the label is then constructive. Indeed, by explicitly naming human strengths, the person labeled as well as those who are informed of his or her label may come to find merit in the label (Snyder et al., 2003). Hence, a therapist who indicates, for example, that the client, in addition to meeting criteria for a DSM diagnostic label of major depressive disorder, also has high levels of resilience, personal growth initiative, and social intelligence, and is a loving parent who is holding down a stable job with the help of a supportive social network, assists the client in seeing himself or herself as more than just the symptoms of pathology that are present. The client will actually find merit in the strengths that were reported, rather than assuming that everyone has those qualities or simply failing to realize that they have strengths. Human strengths become salient when named. When clients are labeled as having talents, strengths, abilities, and positive resources, they become more cognizant of their potential, more interested in nurturing these talents and strengths, and more confident in utilizing these skills and positive resources in the pursuit of complete mental health (Magyar-Moe, 2009).

Individual Counseling

Clinicians working with individual therapy clients can utilize one or more forms of therapy informed by positive psychology as the primary form of treatment or to augment treatment-as-usual depending on the client and his or her presenting issues. Formal positive psychological therapy models that have been described within the scholarly literature to date include Strengths-Based Counseling (Smith, 2006), Strengths-Centered Therapy (Wong, 2006), Quality of Life Therapy (Frisch, 2006), Well-being Therapy (Ruini & Fava, 2004), Hope Therapy (Lopez, Floyd, et al., 2000), and Positive Psychotherapy (Rashid, 2008). A brief presentation of these models follows. (See Magyar-Moe, 2009, for a thorough review of these models, inclusive of print-ready client exercises, assessments, handouts, and worksheets.)

Strengths-Based Counseling

Strengths-Based Counseling combines positive psychology, counseling psychology, prevention, positive youth development, social work, solution-focused therapy, and narrative therapy (Smith, 2006). The model is based on 12 propositions carried out in 10 stages. The first 3 stages (i.e., building a therapeutic alliance, identifying strengths, and assessing presenting problems) focus on creating a strong therapeutic alliance via helping clients identify and use their strengths. Clients are taught to narrate or reframe their life stories from a strengths perspective (i.e., helping a client to view oneself as a survivor rather than a victim of child abuse). A thorough assessment of the clients’ perceptions of their problems occurs as well (Smith, 2006). Clients are facilitated in uncovering strengths at the biological (i.e., rest, nutrition, exercise), psychological (i.e., both cognitive strengths, such as problem-solving abilities, and emotional strengths, such as self-esteem), social (i.e., connections with friends and family), cultural (i.e., beliefs, values, positive ethnic identity), economic (i.e., being employed, sufficient money for covering basic needs), and political (i.e., equal opportunity) levels. Solution-building conversations often using principles of solution-focused interviewing (see De Jong & Berg, 2002) are utilized in the process of identifying clients’ most valuable strengths and reviewing therapy progress (Smith, 2006).

Strengths-Centered Therapy

Strengths-Centered Therapy (Wong, 2006) incorporates character strengths and virtues (Peterson & Seligman, 2004) as central to the counseling process. Over the course of a few weeks or months, clients cycle through four phases (explicitizing, envisioning, empowering, and evolving).

The explicitizing phase includes validating clients’ concerns in a way that also highlights strengths through helping clients name their existing character strengths. For example, a client may feel very sad. While validating the sadness, the therapist subsequently points out the strength of hope revealed by seeking therapy (Magyar-Moe, 2009). The envisioning phase includes identifying strengths and the utility of the strengths in accomplishing goals. The empowering phase boosts motivation and empowerment as clients use their strengths to positively affect their lives. Finally, the evolving phase terminates psychotherapy and involves the process of making strengths-development a never-ending process that transcends the formal psychotherapeutic process (Wong, 2006).

Quality of Life Therapy

Quality of Life Therapy blends the tenets of positive psychology with cognitive therapy to help clients discover and proceed toward their needs, goals, and wishes to live a life of quality and satisfaction (Frisch, 2006). Quality of Life Therapy emphasizes a Whole Life or Life Goal perspective with specific interventions for each through the treatment stages (Frisch, 2006). Clients are conceptualized using strengths and weaknesses in 16 areas of functioning, which are the major focus of this treatment approach and can be measured using the Quality of Life Inventory (QOLI; Frisch, 1994).

Quality of Life Therapy uses cognitive interventions to address issues revealed in a fivefold model of life satisfaction, the CASIO model (Frisch, 2006). Satisfaction in any area of life consists of four client issues: (a) the objective Circumstances, (b) the subjective Attitudes, (c) the fulfillment Standards, (d) the Importance of the life area for well-being, and (e) the Overall life satisfaction. The CASIO model guides clients through the important life domains to gain more overall satisfaction and well-being.

Well-being Therapy

Well-being Therapy (Ruini & Fava, 2004) is a brief, structured, directive, and problem-oriented treatment program based on Ryff’s (1989b) model of psychological well-being. Ryff’s model contains six dimensions about which clients are informed: environmental mastery, personal growth, purpose in life, autonomy, self-acceptance, and positive relations with others. Clients are assisted in moving from low to high levels of functioning in each domain via identification of current and previous well-being experiences in their lives, no matter how brief those well-being experiences may have been. Structured writing about well-being experiences and the circumstances of such experiences is utilized for enhancing awareness of the instances of well-being in clients’ lives. Clients identify unhelpful thoughts and beliefs that the therapist challenges using cognitive approaches while encouraging behaviors and actions likely to elicit feelings of well-being.

Hope Therapy

Several therapy approaches are based on hope theory’s assertion that emotions can be changed by addressing the evaluations of effectiveness in goal pursuits (Snyder, 2002). Hope Therapy (Lopez, Floyd, et al., 2000) aims to assist clients in creating goals, producing multiple pathways to reach goals, and generating motivation to pursue goals to enhance clients’ self-perceptions. Using a brief, semi-structured format, hope therapy focuses upon current goals by examining past successes. Four major processes are addressed: Hope Finding, Hope Bonding, Hope Enhancing, and Hope Reminding.

Hope Finding uses narrative and educational strategies for discovering extant client hope. Hope Bonding consists of fostering a strong, hopeful working alliance via engaging clients in their own treatment planning and outcome goal-setting while striving to understand clients in their totality. Several Hope Therapy techniques can be utilized for helping clients who struggle with the process of goal development. Indeed, for some, developing goals is not easy because they are uncertain about where to begin. Hence, therapists can help provide structure for goal development by asking clients to create lists of their various life domains, prioritizing those that are most important, and rating current client levels of satisfaction within each domain. Next, positive, specific, and workable goals are developed for each life domain. This is done collaboratively between clients and therapists (Lopez et al., 2004).

Hope Enhancing is designed to increase hopeful thinking in clients who may be lacking hope in general or in a specific life domain. This is done by providing structure for goal development and pathways planning aimed at helping clients to shift their focus from reducing negative to increasing positive behaviors (Lopez, Floyd, et al., 2000). Clients who struggle with the agency component of hope are assisted to increase their motivation to work toward goals by coming to understand what, in general, serves to motivate them (Lopez, Floyd, et al., 2000). Asking questions about what has motivated clients in the past and how they have previously overcome barriers can prove useful. In addition, teaching clients to engage in positive rather than negative self-talk about their abilities to successfully pursue goals while also learning to enjoy the process of working toward a goal rather than focusing only on the outcome is advised (Snyder, 1994).

Hope Reminding consists of teaching clients how to self-monitor their own hopeful thinking and use of Hope Enhancing techniques, so that they can sustain high hope levels independent of their therapists (Lopez et al., 2004). Hope Reminding can be carried out by providing clients with mini-assignments or interventions such as: (a) having them review their personal hope stories as generated during the Hope Finding phase of therapy; (b) finding a “hope buddy” in their personal life that they can turn to for assistance in goal planning or for reinforcement when goal pursuits become difficult; (c) reflecting upon successful goal pursuits and what they did that led to the success; or (d) completing automatic thought records to understand and confront barrier thoughts (Lopez et al., 2004).

Although there is evidence that hope is prevalent across cultures and ethnic groups (Chang & Banks, 2007), it has also been reported that barriers arise more often in the goal pursuits for some members of minority groups due to such factors as prejudice, racism, sexism, stereotyping, poverty, acculturation stress, language barriers, lack of privilege, and more. These obstacles exist on various levels, including the interpersonal, societal, and institutional (Lopez, Gariglietti, et al., 2000).

Culturally appropriate Hope Therapy requires awareness that various obstacles are more likely to be encountered by members of diverse groups, and also to realize that some marginalized racial or ethnic minority groups within the United States have shown equal and higher hope levels than European Americans (Chang & Banks, 2007). Indeed, it appears that early experiences or expectancies of goal-related obstacles for some minorities may serve as opportunities for developing higher levels of hope and greater pathways thinking later in life. Helping clients to develop goals within the context of their cultural frameworks and examining factors that are likely to make goals more or less available or attainable is key. Provision of culture-specific examples of hope during the narrative work of the Hope Finding phase of Hope Therapy is also recommended (Lopez, Floyd, et al., 2000).

Positive Psychotherapy

Positive Psychotherapy is an empirically supported approach to psychotherapy that attends specifically to building client strengths and positive emotions, and increasing meaning in the lives of clients to alleviate psychopathology and foster happiness (Rashid, 2008; Seligman, Rashid, & Parks, 2006). Seligman’s (2002) concept of happiness (the pleasant life, the engaged life, and the meaningful life) provides the theoretical basis. Positive psychotherapists elicit and attend to positive emotions and memories in their discussions with clients while also engaging in discourse related to client problems with the goal of integrating the positive and negative together (Rashid, 2008).

Positive psychotherapy consists of 14 sessions with homework assignments. For example, Sessions 1 and 2 focus upon client identification of character strengths. Other sessions address the concepts of gratitude, forgiveness, optimism, love and attachment, savoring, and meaning (see Magyar-Moe, 2009; Rashid, 2008).

Individual positive psychotherapy for clients with depression has resulted in increased happiness, fewer depressive symptoms, and more complete remissions of depression when compared with treatment-as-usual and treatment-as-usual with antidepressant medication (Seligman et al., 2006). Group positive psychotherapy for mild or moderate levels of depression also resulted in greater reduction of depressive symptoms and increased life satisfaction lasting for a year in comparison to a no-treatment control group (Seligman et al., 2006). Similarly, an abbreviated group version with middle school children led to increased well-being (Rashid & Anjum, 2007). In addition, many of the homework exercises have been validated through web-based studies (Seligman et al., 2005). Rashid (2008) concluded that “Positive Psychotherapy has demonstrated efficacy, with large to medium effect sizes” (p. 205).

Extending Positive Psychology to Schools

The importance of children’s SWB upon educational achievement is central. In a study of 23 countries and 39 U.S. states, Sznitman, Reisel, and Romer (2011) found that the relationship between child poverty and educational achievement was mediated by well-being. Fortunately, positive psychological interventions within schools are growing to meet the challenge of increasing the well-being of children and adolescents in schools (Huebner & Furlong, 2014; McCabe, Bray, Kehle, Theodore, & Gelbar, 2011; Miller & Nickerson, 2007).

In their latest edition of examining positive psychology in schools, Gilman, Huebner, and Furlong (2014) asserted that legislative mandates and training models led to an unfortunate focus upon fixing what is broken in the mistaken belief that focusing upon problems would create optimal development in children. Their book provides an international picture of an alternative approach via the application of positive psychology in schools. For example, Renshaw et al. (2014) presented a model and measure of positive mental health for children and adolescents, covitality, as a counter-construct to comorbidity. Covitality is made up of four self-schema latent traits: emotional competence (i.e., emotional regulation, self-control, and empathy), engaged living (i.e., optimism, zest, gratitude), belief-in-self (i.e., self-awareness, self-efficacy, and grit), and belief-in-other (i.e., family coherence, peer support, and school support). They have found covitality is highly predictive of student school achievement and quality of life, while negatively correlated with depression and anxiety. The measure can be employed as a school-wide screening measure for designing systemic interventions. Although no cross-cultural data were presented, international studies are underway.

Several promising positive psychology interventions have also been designed for the school setting. For example, Strengths Gym incorporates character strengths exercises for adolescents into the school curriculum (Proctor et al., 2011). The intervention increased students’ life satisfaction compared with the students who did not participate. A series of Making Hope Happen programs designed to enhance student hope in school settings have been implemented with elementary (Edwards & Lopez, 2000) and junior high school students (Pedrotti, Lopez, & Krieshok, 2000). Participants in the elementary school program reported significant increases in hope levels from pre- to post-test. Those in the junior high school program had significantly higher levels of hope in comparison with their counterparts who did not participate in the program, and the higher hope levels were maintained after 6 months, pointing to the robustness of the intervention even after the program was completed.

A similar psychoeducational intervention program was developed and tested with sixth-grade students in Portugal (Marques, Lopez, & Pais-Ribeiro, 2009). The program was designed to target the enhancement of hope, life satisfaction, self-worth, mental health, and academic achievement; however, compared with previous hope intervention studies with children, Marques et al. (2009) included an intervention component focused upon the key social networks in the lives of the student participants, namely, parents, guardians, and teachers. Results indicated higher hope and greater levels of life satisfaction and self-worth for those in the intervention group following the 5-week intervention; these gains were maintained at 6-month and 18-month follow-ups. The results did not support any significant changes in mental health or academic achievement as a result of the intervention. Although positive psychology courses have not yet become a part of teacher education programs in the United States (Conoley & Conoley, 2014), the evidence is building for the incorporation of such training given the importance of increasing the well-being of children and adolescents in educational achievement (e.g., Renshaw et al., 2014; Sznitman et al., 2011).

Connecting Core Vocational Theories to Positive Psychology

Vocational development has long been a core value of Counseling Psychology (Gelso & Fretz, 2001; Gelso et al., 2014). Similarly, the intersection of vocational psychology and positive psychology has had long-standing roots, as vocational psychology has historically manifested many positive psychology principles, such as a focus upon client development, abilities, and strengths (Lent & Brown, 2006; Robitschek & Woodson, 2006). Over time, core vocational theories have involved a more apparent connection with positive psychological principles. For example, Robitschek and Woodson (2006) asserted that Super’s (1980) life-span, life-space theory of career development addresses multiple concepts central to positive psychology, such as work, love, and play (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). Super’s theory involves various life roles (e.g., worker, citizen) and how these roles emerge throughout the life span with an emphasis on positive development. Lent, Brown, and Hackett’s (1994) social cognitive theory involves several components relevant to positive psychology, including its developmental nature and inclusion of self-efficacy. Furthermore, Lent and Brown (2006) identified work satisfaction and SWB as variables present within the social cognitive career theory. Finally, career construction involves exploring how work promotes meaning and well-being through clients narrating their career autobiographies and imagining possible selves (Savickas, 1997, 2005; Savickas et al., 2009). A large component of what constitutes one’s level of SWB is work and occupational roles (Diener, 1984). Specifically, it is argued that experienced happiness and life satisfaction are directly influenced by career construction (Hartung & Taber, 2007).

Over time, the theoretical view of vocational psychology and practice of career counseling has continued to move further away from the goal of finding a “good fit” to a greater emphasis on adaptability (Savickas, 1997; Super & Knasel, 1981). Krieshok, Black, and McKay’s (2009) trilateral model of adaptive career decision making and Savickas and colleagues’ (2009) concept of life design particularly emphasize adaptability, which parallels the positive psychological view of adaptability—the experience of optimal functioning during times of change (Rettew, 2009). In addition, unique to Krieshok and colleagues’ model is the inclusion of engagement, which has been central to positive psychology.

Positive Psychological Constructs in the Context of Vocational Psychology

Several constructs central to positive psychology have been examined in the work context, including positive emotions, well-being, optimism, and hope. In a longitudinal study, Hasse, Poulin, and Heckhausen (2012) found positive affect predicted motivation in pursuing career goals, highlighting the importance of positive emotions in career counseling. In addition, happiness predicts positive performance evaluations (Cropanzano & Wright, 1999), social support in the workplace (Iverson, Olekalns, & Erwin, 1998), assisting coworkers (George, 1991), and a higher income (Diener & Biswas-Diener, 2002). In a qualitative study, participants reported that positive emotions were felt during positive career experiences; however, a combination of positive and negative emotions were also present, particularly when the experience entailed a new role (Kidd, 2008). A number of cross-sectional, longitudinal, and experimental studies suggest that the experience of positive emotions increases feelings of success across a variety of domains in the workplace (for a review, see Boehm & Lyubomirsky, 2008).

More recently, the definition of vocational success has shifted from objective measures (e.g., promotions, retention) to subjective measures (e.g., satisfaction, contentment; Hall & Chandler, 2005) with an increasing focus on understanding career well-being or job-specific well-being (Kidd, 2008; Warr, 2002). Career well-being is conceptualized as an ongoing state to which several variables contribute, including: (a) opportunities for voluntary mobility/successful adjustment to a new role; (b) support, feedback, and recognition; (c) autonomy and power; (d) using skills and performing well; (e) a purposeful and optimistic orientation; (f) developing skills; and (g) work/life balance (Kidd, 2008). Kidd (2008) contended career well-being is most likely threatened when one loses his or her job or experiences difficulty adjusting to a new role. Warr (2002) conceptualized job-related well-being as comprised of three axes, ranging from pleasure to displeasure, comfort to anxiety, and enthusiasm to depression. Furthermore, Warr identified 10 job characteristics as contributing factors to well-being: (a) opportunity for personal control, (b) opportunity for skill use, (c) externally generated goals (e.g., work pressure, work–family conflict), (d) variety, (e) environmental clarity (e.g., role clarity, information about consequences), (f) availability of money, (g) physical security, (h) supportive supervision, (i) opportunity for interpersonal contact (e.g., good relationships, social support), and (j) valued social position. However, it appears well-being related to careers differs based on developmental stage. In a longitudinal study of adolescents transitioning to adulthood, employment and school continuation did not significantly influence well-being (Borgen, Amundson, & Tench, 1996). Rather, difficulties with finances, finding meaningful activities, and an external attribution style affected well-being during these transitions (Borgen et al., 1996).

Optimism also appears to play an important role in one’s career. Optimism and flexibility were the best predictors of success in one’s career, and optimism, continuous learning, and planfulness were the best predictors of job satisfaction (Neault, 2002). In another study, similar findings were demonstrated; individuals with higher optimism had greater levels of career planning and exploration, confidence in career decisions, and more goals related to careers (Creed, Patton, & Bartrum, 2002).

The construct of hope has also gained a substantial presence in the vocational psychology literature. Niles, Amundson, and Neault (2011) developed a Hope-Centered Model of Career Development. This model is comprised of the following: (a) hope, (b) self-reflection, (c) self-clarity, (d) visioning, (e) goal-setting/planning, and (f) implementing/adapting (Niles et al., 2011). Hope, within this model, aligns with Snyder’s (2002) definition. Self-reflection involves examining one’s self-concept, and self-clarity is a lifelong process that develops as one engages in self-reflection. Visioning involves identifying various career options and desired outcomes. Next, goals are identified and put into action (implementation). During the implementation phase, individuals must remain adaptable, as goals may change due to internal or external influences. The specific construct “work hope” and the Work Hope Scale developed out of the natural application of hope theory in the work setting (Juntunen & Wettersten, 2006). Work hope is defined as a “positive motivational state that is directed at work and work-related goals and is composed of the presence of work-related goals and both the agency and the pathways for achieving those goals” (Juntunen & Wettersten, 2006, p. 97). In addition, research has demonstrated the link between hope and various work-related variables. In a sample of African American college students, hope was positively correlated with vocational identity (Jackson & Neville, 1998). A meta-analysis of hope in the workplace found that hope was positively related to employee self-rated performance, well-being, and less stress and burnout (Reichard et al., 2013).

Specific Applications of Positive Psychology Interventions in Career Counseling

Positive psychology interventions in the context of career counseling have been examined in at least two studies; Strengths-Based Career Counseling (SBCC; Littman-Ovadia, Lazar-Butbul, & Benjamin, 2014) and a strengths-based group within a career exploration course (Owens, Motl, & Krieshok, 2015).

SBCC consists of four counseling sessions with the goal of clients recognizing and using character strengths to achieve career goals (Littman-Ovadia et al., 2014). The VIA Strengths Inventory was used to identify strengths that were subsequently used in the job search, along with additional techniques. Following this intervention, the SBCC group experienced greater self-esteem compared with treatment-as-usual. Three months later, the SBCC group reported a higher rate of employment and endorsed a greater contribution from counseling to their employment/educational status.

Owens and colleagues (2015) examined the outcomes of a two session strengths-based career counseling protocol. Depending on the experimental condition, participants took (a) the StrengthsFinder (Clifton, Anderson, & Schreiner, 2006) and completed strength-oriented exercises, (b) the Strong Interest Inventory (SII; Donnay, Morris, Schaubhut, & Thompson, 2005) and completed interest-oriented exercises, or (c) both the SII and StrengthsFinder along with a combination of the interest and strengths-oriented exercises. Main effects emerged for environmental exploration, intended-systematic exploration, frequency in the amount of information sought, amount of information acquired, focus, satisfaction with information, employee outlook, and certainty of career exploration outcomes (components of career exploration), as well as career decision self-efficacy. Furthermore, several variables of career exploration (focus, satisfaction with information, and employee outlook) and life satisfaction increased most in the combined strengths and interest protocol compared to the strengths protocol.