--edit-- Ok, you edited in a link. Do you have like a metanalysis or something? Individual studies, especially in psychology with its myriad quality problems[1], are hard to take at face value without context.
What do you think is the gold standard study supporting hedonic adaptation over large populations? At least the studies referenced on Wikipedia don’t seem to be particularly supportive of the idea.
I suspect that this is a comforting idea that people like to believe, but not actually something supported by data.
The fact that you are asking someone how they feel makes them feel different to how they would have felt if you didn't ask, and how you pose the question impacts the answer as well.
This is effect is so profound it's used in therapy. A therapist may have you note how you feel at points during the day, and the act of doing so changes how you feel.
This combination of observer effect and suggestion is really hard to avoid even if you try, it's very easy to manufacture results based on how you phrase the question.
In my experience this is obviously true.
People who have a positive outset are more likable and more likely to have successful careers, whereas people who are depressed are more likely to neglect their jobs and relations and as as a result will struggle economically.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01676...
Edit since you rewrote your comment: I’m sorry if these studies aren’t convincing to you, I’m still waiting to see one supporting your point of view.
In general I don't think abstracts and studies are particularly convincing, given the field is infamous for its quality problems. I can't in good faith argue like that.
Sorry if I’m wrong, but you’re on HN and seem pretty technically oriented.
Do you not think that less stressed people are happier?
Regardless of what they are attempting to measure, the tool they are using is used to measure stress.
Chronic stress can absolutely make you less happy, but it's not the single source of unhappiness, and the complete absence of stress isn't equivalent to happiness either. People need challenge in their lives. Not overbearing challenge, but not too little either.
-
Look at it this way: Even some of our poorest can turn night into day with a light switch, can produce potable water from a tap, can see and talk to people across the entire planet, we can travel faster than the fastest horse, can read almost any book from any time without even having to master latin and greek. Our kids don't have a 75% chance of dying, our noses aren't falling off from syphilis, nobody is going mad from ergotism, we have access to seasonal foods all year long.
So if it is true that having wealth makes us happy, why isn't everyone living in perpetual bliss, given we have wealth that exceeds the wildest imagination of past times' kings and emperors? Why aren't we happier than we are? Or was Alexander the Great suffering and miserable from not having a new model iphone?
A. You start your life at this level based on what life your family can afford. You can't control it, you can just adapt. You get used to it and that is your base level. You have some "needs" that were not possible at this level and this is your ambition level.
B. Depending on a lot of factors you can go in any direction from level A. If you have a lot of motivation - you will work hard and if you are lucky - you will get to higher levels, if not - you can even degrade compared to the level your parents are in. Most of the things that you dreamed of as a child will not be at the billionaire level. Probably most things will be at the level C, which is slightly higher than what your parents had (depends on a lot of factors like your character etc.)
C. This is the level where you probably fulfilled all your child dreams and wants. You can afford everything your parents could + something on top of it. This is usually the easiest level to get to - you can get here by exploiting tools of level B given to you by your parents + smart work from your side. While you fulfil your child dreams you start become smarter as well and some of the crazy child dreams, which seemed genius (buy 100 Lego boxes and build the most epic Star Wars fleet among my friends) now seem irrelevant and is not worth the resources. If you haven't reached level C - additional resources will bring you happiness doesn't matter if this level is at 75000 or 1M. If you reached it you have a decision to make.
D. Next level after C. It is much more harder and riskier to reach it. You might need to sacrifice your family, time and life to reach it. But all your basic wants and needs are met. So now you face a few great options:
1. You can keep increasing your needs and now your level C becomes your level B and D becomes your new level C. This comes with the risk to lose your ground at the level C and get back to Level B or lower. You become unhappy again before you reach your new level C.
2. You can stop raising your needs, give it some time and/or hard work and cement your position at level C. Diversify, deleverage, lower risk profile etc. This works toward your feeling of security, which increases happiness, but not to the extent of new needs.
3. You can do #1+#2 and reach level #2 faster with higher risk.
As you can see at the level D you are looking for a mindset change. Before that you had a clear goal of "why do I need more money", but when you are at the level D you have to come up with new goals. This is the most exciting place to be in my mind.
See Anton Kreil's "Build and Own Your Own Infrastructure" - this talk changed my perspective on my personal financial goals.