A recent study in the Journal of Personality sheds new light on the connection between political views and well-being. The findings indicate that those with more liberal views tend to experience lives filled with psychological richness, marked by diverse and stimulating experiences. While happiness and meaning are associated with conservative values, psychological richness appears to be more common among those with fewer conservative views.
Previous research on well-being and political beliefs has largely focused on two primary aspects of a fulfilling life: happiness and meaning. Happiness is often defined by life satisfaction and positive emotions, while meaning involves a sense of purpose or fulfillment. Studies have consistently found that conservative beliefs are associated with higher levels of both happiness and meaning.
This connection may be due to factors such as system justification, the belief that societal structures are fair, which can create a stable foundation for feeling content and purposeful. For example, conservatives are generally more likely to see social systems as just and reliable, which might lead to a greater sense of stability and satisfaction. Furthermore, the Protestant work ethic—a belief in the value of hard work as a path to success—is often embraced by conservatives and has been tied to a strong sense of life purpose.
However, previous studies mostly overlooked a third dimension of a fulfilling life: psychological richness. Psychological richness refers to a life filled with new, varied, and stimulating experiences that broaden one’s perspective. This quality differs from happiness or meaning in that it emphasizes diversity and complexity over contentment or purpose. Individuals who lead psychologically rich lives seek diverse experiences and view challenges or changes as opportunities for growth.
This dimension is especially relevant given that openness to experience—a personality trait commonly linked to psychological richness—is also often linked with liberal values. Thus, the authors of this study wanted to investigate if this previously neglected aspect of well-being might be more closely associated with liberal beliefs,offering a fuller picture of how different political ideologies relate to unique facets of a good life.
The research consisted of six studies designed to examine the relationships between political beliefs and different dimensions of well-being: happiness, meaning, and psychological richness. Each study employed slightly different samples, procedures, and measures to gradually build a comprehensive understanding of these associations across various populations and cultural contexts.
Study 1 served as the foundation, using a convenience sample of 583 students from an American university to explore how conservative worldviews, such as system justification and the Protestant work ethic, correlate with happiness, meaning, and psychological richness. Participants completed the 15-item Good Life Scale to assess their levels of happiness, meaning, and psychological richness. Participants rate statements describing their lives, such as “enjoyable” or “comfortable” for happiness, “purposeful” or “fulfilling” for meaning, and “interesting” or dramatic” for psychologically richness.
The initial study found that happiness and meaning were positively linked to conservative beliefs, whereas psychological richness showed little to no association. These findings laid the groundwork for further research, indicating that while traditional markers of well-being like happiness and meaning are more common among conservative individuals, psychological richness may not be.
Study 2 expanded on these initial findings by investigating a broader set of variables, including political orientation and personality traits. Using a new sample of 348 American college students, researchers measured participants’ happiness, meaning, and psychological richness levels, as well as their political orientation (from very liberal to very conservative). The inclusion of the Big Five personality traits provided additional context, as openness to experience, in particular, is commonly associated with liberal beliefs and psychological richness.
Results from this study confirmed the initial findings from Study 1, with happiness and meaning correlating with conservatism. Additionally, this study found a weak but negative association between psychological richness and conservatism.
Study 3 continued to refine the approach by including additional measures of happiness, meaning, and psychological richness to ensure consistent results. This study sampled 436 college students from a different American university, aiming to replicate the findings from Study 2 while adding depth through multiple measures. For instance, happiness was measured using both the Satisfaction with Life Scale and the Good Life Scale, while psychological richness was measured with the Psychologically Rich Life Questionnaire.
This more detailed approach, however, found that the associations between conservatism and the three well-being aspects were weaker than in previous studies. This suggested that the relationship might vary depending on how well-being is measured or across different student demographics, indicating a need for a more representative sample.
Study 4 addressed the limitations of previous studies by using a large, nationally representative sample of 1,217 adults from across the United States. This allowed the researchers to explore whether the findings generalized beyond college students and across a more diverse demographic. Participants answered similar measures of happiness, meaning, and psychological richness as well as additional questions about their political orientation.
This study revealed a consistent pattern: happiness and meaning remained positively associated with conservatism, while psychological richness was more prevalent among those with liberal beliefs. The nationally representative sample strengthened the reliability of the findings, highlighting that the associations between political beliefs and these three dimensions of well-being extended beyond a university context.
Study 5 extended the research to a non-Western context by recruiting 2,176 adult participants in South Korea. Given that political conservatism and liberalism might have different cultural meanings in Korea than in the United States, this study aimed to see if the patterns observed in the American context would hold in a different cultural setting. Using translations of the same scales from previous studies, participants in South Korea reported their levels of happiness, meaning, and psychological richness, as well as their political beliefs adapted to reflect Korean cultural and social issues.
Results showed that while happiness and system justification were still positively associated with conservatism, psychological richness did not strongly correlate with political beliefs, suggesting that the relationship between political orientation and psychological richness may vary depending on cultural context.
Study 6 was a pre-registered replication study using a sample of 617 American college students to confirm the key findings from Studies 1 through 5. This study focused on validating the relationships between happiness, meaning, and psychological richness and conservative beliefs, using structural equation modeling to account for measurement errors and ensure statistical rigor.
By replicating the results with the same procedures, Study 6 reinforced the findings that happiness and meaning are linked with conservatism, while psychological richness is more often associated with liberal beliefs when happiness and meaning are statistically controlled.
“Across six studies, we largely replicate earlier findings that happiness was associated with slightly more political conservatism,” the researchers wrote. “Happiness was also associated with system justification, or the tendency to see the current political, economic, and societal systems to be fair and defendable. Meanwhile, meaning in life was consistently associated with Protestant work ethic, or the view that hard work will lead to success in life.”
On the other hand, the “correlations between psychological richness and conservative worldviews were in general null or slightly positive… The present findings add to the emerging literature on psychological richness, providing empirical support and construct validity for the basic postulate that a psychologically rich life is related but distinct from a happy life or a meaningful life.”
But the study has limitations. One challenge lies in the correlational nature of the data, which means it cannot determine whether political beliefs directly influence well-being or if other factors are involved. Moreover, since the participants self-reported their well-being, social desirability bias—a tendency to present oneself in a positive light—might have influenced responses, particularly for qualities like happiness and meaning.
Future research could explore other factors that influence psychological richness beyond political orientation, as well as examine whether similar trends exist in different cultural settings. Researchers could also look into longitudinal data to better understand the cause-and-effect relationships between political beliefs and aspects of well-being.
“We are not claiming that a psychologically rich life is by any means better than a happy life or a meaningful life,” the researchers concluded. “Indeed, it is clear that a happy life and a meaningful life are desirable lives, associated with stable social relationships, prosocial behaviors, and health.”
“Our work merely illustrates that a good life should not be narrowly construed as only either a happy life or a meaningful life, and that this restricted view can obscure other important aspects of a good life—such as low levels of system justification and desire for societal changes. By broadening our understanding of what the “good” in a good life includes, the concept of psychological richness opens up new conceptual space within the science of well-being.”
The study, “Differing worldviews: The politics of happiness, meaning, and psychological richness,” was authored by Shigehiro Oishi, Hyewon Choi, Youngjae Cha, Samantha Heintzelman, Nicholas R. Buttrick, and Erin C. Westgate.
