Take the 2-minute tour ×
Cognitive Sciences Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for practitioners, researchers, and students in cognitive science, psychology, neuroscience, and psychiatry. It's 100% free, no registration required.

When a person says he would be happy to win the lottery he is usually wrong? Why are people bad at judging their happiness in the future? A person who knows that he will get a fancy house in the future thinks he will be happy. But when he ends up living in it he is not as happy as the thought he would be.

share|improve this question
4  
Hedonic treadmill –  AsheeshR Aug 22 '13 at 0:12

1 Answer 1

Like many people, I do this a lot, the whole thought process "If I won the lotto...". Following on from the term that AsheeshR linked in his comment, there has been several studies on the phenomenon of the Hedonic Treadmill.

One particular study is "Getting off the hedonic treadmill, one step at a time: The impact of regular religious practice and exercise on well-being" (Mochon et al. 2008), where they assert that a sudden large event, such as winning the lotto gives an initial burst of happiness, but we quickly adapt, from the article:

Many studies have shown that few events in life have a lasting impact on subjective well-being because of people’s tendency to adapt quickly; worse, those events that do have a lasting impact tend to be negative.

Whereas, regular small-scale events, using the examples provided in the article: exercise, religious attendance, and I'll add seeing a good movie, meeting an old friend etc may do so

by providing small but frequent boosts: if people engage in such behaviors with sufficient frequency, they may cumulatively experience enough boosts to attain higher well-being.

The authors of the article suggest that major events, such as winning the lotto do not promote a lasting sense of well being as do frequent smaller scale events.

An earlier study that found similar results was "Lottery winners and accident victims: is happiness relative?" (Brickman et al. 1978).

share|improve this answer
2  
This is actually a very, very enlightening answer. –  user3433 Aug 24 '13 at 1:12
    
This doesn't answer the question 'why'. Actually, ideally this would have been posted as part of the question to motivate the 'why' question, as this is just observing what the OP was just assuming to be true. –  Steven Jeuris Aug 25 '13 at 11:29

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.