Everyday prosociality in the workplace: The reinforcing benefits of giving, getting, and glimpsing.

A functional analysis of prosociality considers how predispositions for prosocial behavior prompt, reinforce, and propagate kind behaviors in the real world. To examine the effects of practicing, receiving, and observing everyday prosociality-as well as the mechanisms underlying these effects-we randomly assigned employees in a Spanish corporate workplace (N = 111) to be Givers, Receivers, and Controls. Givers practiced 5 acts of kindness for a personalized list of Receivers over 4 weeks. We found that Givers and Receivers mutually benefited in well-being in both the short-term (e.g., on weekly measures of competence and autonomy) and the long-term (e.g., Receivers became happier after 2 months, and Givers became less depressed and more satisfied with their lives and jobs). In addition, Givers' prosocial acts inspired others to act: Receivers paid their acts of kindness forward with 278% more prosocial behaviors than Controls. Our results reveal that practicing everyday prosociality is both emotionally reinforcing and contagious (inspiring kindness and generating hedonic rewards in others) and that receiving everyday prosociality is an unequivocally positive experience (which may further reinforce Givers' actions). Prosociality's benefits shed light on its surprising ubiquity in humanity compared with our closest evolutionary cousins. (PsycINFO Database Record

Moderators of wellbeing interventions: Why do some people respond more positively than others?

Interventions rarely have a universal effect on all individuals. Reasons ranging from participant characteristics, context and fidelity of intervention completion could cause some people to respond more positively than others. Understanding these individual differences in intervention response may provide clues to the mechanisms behind the intervention, as well as inform future designs to make interventions maximally beneficial for all. Here we focus on an intervention designed to improve adolescent wellbeing, and explore potential moderators using a representative and well-powered sample. 16-year old participants (N = 932) in the Twins Wellbeing Intervention Study logged online once a week to complete control and wellbeing-enhancing activities consecutively. Throughout the study participants also provided information about a range of potential moderators of intervention response including demographics, seasonality, personality, baseline characteristics, activity fit, and effort. As expected, some individuals gained more from the intervention than others; we used multi-level modelling to test for moderation effects that could explain these individual differences. Of the 15 moderators tested, none significantly explained individual differences in intervention response in the intervention and follow-up phases. Self-reported effort and baseline positive affect had a notable effect in moderating response in the control phase, during which there was no overall improvement in wellbeing and mental health. Our results did not replicate the moderation effects that have been suggested by previous literature and future work needs to reconcile these differences. They also show that factors that have previously been shown to influence baseline wellbeing do not also influence an individual's ability to benefit from a wellbeing intervention. Although future research should continue to explore potential moderators of intervention efficacy, our results suggest that the beneficial effect of positive activities in adolescents were universal across such factors as sex and socioeconomic status, bolstering claims of the scalability of positive activities to increase adolescent wellbeing.

Stability and Change in Genetic and Environmental Influences on Well-Being in Response to an Intervention.

Genetic and environmental influences on complex traits can change in response to developmental and environmental contexts. Here we explore the impact of a positive activity intervention on the genetic and environmental influences on well-being and mental health in a sample of 750 adolescent twins. Twins completed a 10-week online well-being intervention, consisting of kindness and gratitude tasks and matched control activities. The results showed significant improvements both in well-being and in internalizing symptoms in response to the intervention activities. We used multivariate twin analyses of repeated measures, tracking stability and change in genetic and environmental influences, to assess the impact of this environmental intervention on these variance components. The heritability of well-being remained high both before and after the intervention, and the same genetic effects were important at each stage, even as well-being increased. The overall magnitude of environmental influences was also stable across the intervention; however, different non-shared environmental influences emerged during the intervention. Our study highlights the value of exploring the innovations in non-shared environmental influences that could provide clues to the mechanisms behind improvements in well-being. The findings also emphasize that even traits strongly influenced by genetics, like well-being, are subject to change in response to environmental interventions.