What does being happy have to do with your health?

Being happy isn’t just about turning lemons into lemonade or ‘always looking on the bright side of life’ like ~ Pollyanna syndrome if you will ~ it is more than that. Being more positive and optimistic can actually have a huge impact on your physical health. Want to know more…check out the Positive Acorn recent blog reviewing some of the latest research of health and happiness:

 

Health and Happiness

By Robert Biswas-Diener of Positive Acorn

www.positiveacorn.com

  

Just the other day I had the opportunity to read an as-yet unpublished report on happiness that will be presented to the United Nations next month. This presentation is part of a trend for policy makers to take happiness seriously as a focus of development. One of the most important aspects of substantiating happiness as a worthwhile concern is to outline the wide body of research showing that happiness does not just feel good, it is actually beneficial.

Of all the myriad aspects of happiness the most compelling evidence for its benefits comes from the area of health. In 2005 researchers published a paper that presented initial evidence that happiness is not only related to health, but is causally related to it. In the 7 years since that publication the research case linking health and happiness has grown. Here are some highlights:

Point 1: Pathways

There are two separate paths by which happiness affects health. First, happiness acts as a buffer against stress which, in turn, affects overall health through hormonal activity and health practices. That is, people who experience prolonged stress are more likely to suffer the ill effects of cortisol (think heart disease) and have unfavorable health practices (lower incidence of wearing seat belts and higher likelihood of drinking alcohol in excess). The other path is the direct link between positive emotion and immune and cardiovascular functioning. It is hear that researchers have found that happiness is causally related to boosted immune systems and less severe symptoms of minor illnesses such as the common cold.

Point 2: Specific health outcomes

We are well beyond some vague notion of "mind-body connection" where happiness is concerned. Researchers have looked at a variety of specific health indicators and found that higher happiness is associated with:

 

-- healthier rates of heart rate variability

-- lower risk of heart disease

-- better healing after injury

-- lower rates of obesity in adolescents

-- better diet and exercise habits

-- lower incidence of eating buttered popcorn (seriously!)

-- lower neuro-endocrine problems in middle-aged people

-- longer lives (as assessed by the use of positive words in the auto-biographies of psychologists!)

Where your own life is concerned this is good news. Happiness is not a selfish pursuit but one that is heavily implicated in a healthier and longer life. This has benefit to you and also to those people who care about you, to your workplace, and to the society in which you live. To learn more about the research on happiness and health you can read the recent review article by Ed Diener here: http://tinyurl.com/3k8eq5y

 Please share your thoughts and questions with us on our Facebook site: https://www.facebook.com/PositiveAcorn  We love to hear from you!

Use your Strengths

In case I wasn't convincing enough throughout my blog, here is even more evidence to support the theory of using your strengths!  Everyone is worried about stress - but using your strengths can actually improve your mood and lower your stress!!! Check it out:

 

 

 

 

September 27, 2012

When Americans Use Their Strengths More, They Stress Less

But most do not use their strengths enough to maximize mood benefits

by Jim Asplund

 

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The more hours per day Americans get to use their strengths to do what they do best, the less likely they are to report experiencing worry, stress, anger, sadness, or physical pain "yesterday." Fifty-two percent of Americans who use their strengths for zero to three hours a day are stressed, but this falls to 36% for Americans who use their strengths for 10 hours per day or more.

Twenty-one percent of Americans use their strengths for three hours or fewer per day and are, therefore, carrying a much heavier emotional burden than adults are who use their strengths throughout the day. About one in four adults use their strengths for 10 hours or more per day -- meaning that three in four adults are not using their strengths enough hours daily to achieve the maximum emotional benefit.

These findings are based on Gallup Daily tracking interviews with 5,049 American adults on Aug. 23-27, 2012. Respondents were asked, "About how many hours out of the day yesterday were you able to use your strengths to do what you do best?"
Gallup has spent more than a half-century studying human strengths and more than 7.8 million people have taken Gallup's Clifton StrengthsFinder assessment -- which tests for 34 specific, unique strengths -- since its inception in 1998.

Americans also gain a boost in positive emotions the more they use their strengths. The more hours per day adults believe they use their strengths, the more likely they are to report having ample energy, feeling well-rested, being happy, smiling or laughing a lot, learning something interesting, and being treated with respect.

Particularly important for workplaces is the added energy adults report when they get to use their strengths frequently during the day. Adults who use their strengths for 10 hours or more per day are 22 percentage points more likely to say they have enough energy to get things done than are those who use their strengths for three hours or less.

The Additive Effect of Strengths
For certain emotions -- particularly happiness and anger -- only a few hours of strengths usage are needed to maximize one's chance of having a good day. By contrast, stress and worry decrease, and respect increases with each additional hour of reported strengths usage. For each of these emotional experiences, every additional hour of strengths usage adds as much benefit as the first hour. One reason why these emotions - stress, worry, and respect -- differ from some of the others may be that laughter and anger tend to be fleeting, momentary experiences. By comparison, respect is an attitude that forms over time.

Strengths usage is often associated with feelings of accomplishment and timelessness. Energizing experiences are often evidence of strengths at work and can help inoculate adults against experiencing stress. Being engaged in an activity at a deep, natural level can result in a lack of the sense of passing time, and indicate a level of engrossment that is consistent with strengths usage. So, apparently, time not only flies when we're having fun, but also when we are using our strengths -- both act to reduce a person's chances of feeling stressed or worried about the present or future, and make life feel meaningful and productive.

Helping employees feel a more personal and meaningful connection with their work is more lucrative than many leaders realize. Gallup data show that employees who simply learn their own strengths are 7.8% more productive. Developing those strengths motivates employees to learn how to best apply themselves and makes them far more likely to care whether their activities are profitable. Being aware of and applying strengths on a daily basis is something everyone can learn to do better.

Survey MethodsResults are based on telephone interviews conducted as part of Gallup Daily tracking Aug. 23-27, 2012, with a random sample of 5,049 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±1.2 percentage points.
The margin of sampling error for any given demographic group is larger, but is typically no greater than ±4 percentage points.
Interviews are conducted with respondents on landline telephones and cellular phones, with interviews conducted in Spanish for respondents who are primarily Spanish-speaking. Each sample includes a minimum quota of 400 cell phone respondents and 600 landline respondents per 1,000 nation adults with additional minimum quotas among landline respondents by region. Landline telephone numbers are chosen at random among listed telephone numbers. Cell phones numbers are selected using random digit dial methods. Landline respondents are chosen at random within each household on the basis of which member had the most recent birthday.
Samples are weighted by gender, age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, education, region, adults in the household, and phone status (cell phone-only/landline only/both, cell phone mostly, and having an unlisted landline number). Demographic weighting targets are based on the March 2011 Current Population Survey figures for the aged 18 and older non-institutionalized population living in U.S. telephone households. All reported margins of sampling error include the computed design effects for weighting and sample design.
In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.
For more details on Gallup's polling methodology, visit http://www.gallup.com/.

Leadership

Preventing Fireworks and Creating Sparklers: A Positive Approach to Remedial Management

Posted: 05 Nov 2012 06:57 AM PST

Posted by: Sue Harrington & Emma Trenier

It’s a telling coincidence that the number one reported reason that people leave their jobs is problems with their manager – and the number one issue that managers dread dealing with is problems with their people. Many managers would rather deal with angry customers or chase challenging sales targets than manage people problems.

One particular area where an escalating vicious cycle of fireworks often exists is managing underperformance and the responsibility for managing this typically falls at the feet of managers.

Research with managers, human resources practitioners and employees has shown that:

• Dealing with underperformance can be a lengthy and time-consuming process, and managers often feel that it conflicts with their ability to deliver their business objectives.
• Managers often feel ‘dumped on’ – they feel that they lack the training to handle complex personal issues, and feel ill prepared to tackle the difficult conversations around underperformance necessary for effective performance management.
• Feeling a lack of confidence or willingness to tackle underperformance can result in managers feeling isolated and unsupported in their roles.
• Communication around underperformance tends to be reactive and too late – conflict has already occurred between the employee and their manager, and these clashing perspectives can cause fireworks: the manager’s, sometimes bungled, attempts to manage underperformance can feel like bullying to the employee, which can then worsen any underperformance.
• Consequently, many grievance and disciplinary issues arise from performance management situations, often from the miscommunication associated with these situations. The worry of this happening can often stop managers from dealing with performance issues early and openly.

So what are the dangerous fireworks to look out for?

• First spark- Cases of underperformance can often be traced back to a specific incident, or a series of incidents that were not addressed at the time – perhaps the manager was too busy, perhaps they didn’t feel comfortable tackling the issue, or perhaps there had never been an on-going process of providing feedback, both good and bad – and it’s hard to start with the bad.
• The slow-burning fizzle – These unresolved issues can then fester, like a Roman Candle – never quite coming to a head like a Rocket, but creating an undercurrent of conflict and miscommunication.
• Big Bang – The longer it is left, the harder the issue is to confront. Conflict can often escalate in these situations, clouding the perceptions of both parties – both the manager and the employee are expecting the other to behave negatively, so that’s what they see. The manager becomes frustrated and angry, the employee feels harassed and may withdraw effort – it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, and one that is very hard to break.

Here are Capp’s 5 steps to creating sparklers and avoiding those fireworks:

• First of all, understand your own strengths – how do they help you deliver timely feedback to your team? How do they help you to tackle more difficult conversations?
• Develop your strengths spotting skills: know what makes each of your team tick, what motivates them, and where their strengths lie. Use this understanding to help your employees recognise and maximize their own strengths.
• Set each individual clear and measureable goals that are aligned to their strengths, goals that will help to unleash potential and maximize performance
• Have regular performance conversations with each of your team. Provide proactive feedback on their performance – give each person examples of what they are doing well.
• Catch any issues early – be honest and clear about areas of potential underperformance and help individuals to think about how they can use their strengths to address any areas of weakness – and always provide examples.

When managers understand their own strengths and weaknesses, and those of their employees, they are better able to flex and personalise their management approach to proactively prevent performance-related conflicts. Capp’s 8-step Performance Manager Programme enables managers to do just this – equipping managers with the skills to manage through strengths, delivering enhanced performance through their people.

Download Capp’s Performance Manager White Paper to find out more about what people want from their managers.

Depression and Job Loss

Check out this recent article by Gallup. Many people are becoming depressed due to the unemployment rates over the last few years. Sadly, many people still have a stigma about getting help or being diagnosed with depression. In the US...things are a bit complicated. If you are unemployed you may not have health insurance to get proper diagnosis or treatment. Also, in the US it is more common to just throw pills at people for the treatment of depression and not go to counseling and getting cognitive behavioral therapy. Though medication does work, it really only helps relieve the symptoms of depression, it doesn't encourage behavior change to avoid negative thoughts or emotions in the present or future.

There is still a huge debate among healthcare providers as to which form of treatment is better for depression: Cognitive Behavioral Therepy or Medication.

 

According to the Association for Behavioral and Cognitive Therapies (http://www.abct.org)

• As a general rule, findings suggest that CBT can do anything that medications can do in the treatment of the nonpsychotic disorders and it can do so without causing problematic side effects. CBT also can address symptoms on a more enduring basis.
• Research suggests that medications often work but they do so only for so long as you keep taking them, whereas CBT may reduce risk for subsequent symptom return long after treatment is over.
• Psychiatric medications typically treat the symptoms but do not cure the disorders, whereas you can learn things in CBT that may reduce your risk of the disorder coming back.
• People with more severe symptoms may benefit from adding medications, particularly among disorders like depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. For the less severe instances of these disorders the evidence for CBT is at least as strong as that for medications and for some disorders it is even stronger.
• Medications tend to work a little faster than CBT (by a matter of weeks) and there are sometimes benefits from using the two in combination or in sequence.
• CBT represents a viable alternative to medications for people with nonpsychotic disorders in most instances. However, there are indications that taking medications may undermine the enduring effects of CBT in some patients.
• Findings regarding the effectiveness of psychotherapy as an alternative to medications is mostly available for CBT therapy. There are many other approaches to psychotherapy; data indicating whether these other approaches are effective are still emerging.

 

Though the treatments can vary and be debated, it is still important that we focus on how depression is hurting our population and we need to make it a priority to get everyone the proper help and care that they deserve.

 

 

============================================================

 

November 21, 2012

Depression Hits Jobless in UK, U.S. More Than in Germany

But depression rates among unemployed are higher than employed in all three places

by Anna Manchin

BRUSSELS -- Unemployed Britons are 15 percentage points more likely than full-time workers to report having ever been diagnosed with depression. The gap in depression rates between the unemployed and employed is a similar 13 points in the U.S., but is lower in Germany at 10 points.

The unemployed in the U.K. and U.S. are about equally likely to self-report a depression diagnosis -- 25% vs. 24%. But unemployed Germans are much less likely to say they have ever suffered from depression, at 16%. Germans are also much less likely than Britons or Americans to report having been diagnosed with depression overall.
Still, in all three countries, those who are not working (unemployed or out of the workforce) are more likely to have ever been diagnosed with depression than those who are employed full time.
The results are from Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index monthly tracking conducted January to September 2012 in the U.K. and Germany, and Gallup Daily tracking conducted in the U.S. from January through October. Gallup classifies those working at least 30 hours a week to be full time.
Gallup has previously found that women and those with lower incomes are more likely to be diagnosed with depression in all three countries.
Part-Time Work Buffers Some From Depression in UK
In the U.K., those who have at least part-time work appear to be better off than those who are completely unemployed. Seventeen percent of Britons working part time but wanting to work full time report a depression diagnosis -- lower than the 25% of the unemployed who do. The same is not true in Germany and the U.S., where those who are underemployed are roughly just as likely as the unemployed to report depression.

In Germany and the U.K., the self-employed are the best off, while self-employed Americans are as likely as those who are employed full time to have ever received a diagnosis of depression.
In the U.S., those who are out of the workforce are almost as likely to be depressed as those who are unemployed, 25% and 24%, respectively. This is not the case in Germany and the U.K., where those who are out of the workforce are less likely to have been diagnosed with depression than the unemployed.
Implications
Those in the U.K., U.S., and Germany who are employed full time -- whether for an employer or for themselves -- are much less likely than those who are out of work to report being diagnosed with depression. However, depression is less prevalent in Germany among both groups, providing a possible area for future research. If the lower rates are in fact due to less depression in Germany, not a lack of diagnosis, Germany could be a useful case study for other countries to learn how to better support their residents' wellbeing.
Still, in the U.S. and Germany, those who are employed part time but who want to work full time struggle with depression almost as much as those who are completely jobless.
It is possible, of course, that the pre-existence of depression can reduce the likelihood that someone will be able to seek out and gain employment. The more intuitive explanation, however, may be the more likely of the two: That the absence of gainful employment increases the probability of a depression diagnosis. This latter scenario suggests that both unemployment and underemployment may have very serious costs to individual wellbeing -- and on a larger scale can strain a country's finances and healthcare resources. A study published in the Journal of Mental Health Policy Economics estimated that, in 2004, depression cost the EU 118 billion euros.
About the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index
The Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index tracks wellbeing in the U.S., U.K., and Germany and provides best-in-class solutions for a healthier world. To learn more, please visit well-beingindex.com.

Survey MethodsResults are based on telephone interviews conducted as part of the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index survey from Jan. 1-Sept. 30, 2012, with a random sample of 8,750 adults, aged 18 and older, living in Germany, and a random sample of 8,940 adults, aged 18 and older, living in the U.K., selected using random-digit-dial sampling. The U.S. results are based on interviews with 292,991 adults 18 and over, conducted between Jan. 1-Oct. 31, 2012.
For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±1.4 percentage points in Germany, 1.3 percentage points in the U.K., and 0.2 percentage points in the U.S.
Interviews are conducted with respondents on landline telephones and cellphones. Samples are weighted by gender, age, education, region, adults in the household, and cellphone status. Demographic weighting targets are based on the most recently published population data from the German Statistics Office. All reported margins of sampling error include the computed design effects for weighting and sample design.
In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.
For more details on Gallup's polling methodology, visit http://www.gallup.com/.

U.S. Hunger

 

According to the Bread for the World Website (http://www.bread.org/): 

 

Our Victories in the Last Six Months

Join Bread Activists for Lobby Day 2012

Listen: Bread's 2012 Hunger Report

Hunger Report Calls on U.S. Leadership to End Hunger Within a Generation

El Informe del Hambre dos mil trece hace un llamado para erradicar el hambre

Give NowWe live in the world's wealthiest nation. Yet 14.5 percent of U.S. households—nearly 49 million Americans, including 16.2 million children—struggle to put food on the table.

In the United States, hunger is not caused by a scarcity of food, but rather the continued prevalence of poverty. Both issues must be addressed in our continued efforts to help those Jesus called "the least of these" (Matthew 25:45).

The most direct way to reduce hunger in the U.S. is through national nutrition programs. But while food assistance to hungry people is vital, it is not enough.

We as a nation must come together to confront hunger and poverty in the United States. Use our resources below to learn more about the causes of U.S. hunger, and what we can do to end it once and for all

This holiday season, let's not over indulge ourselves. Let us remember that there are over 43 million people starving in our own country. The vast majority of them are children. So, think of what the true meaning of the holiday is all about - thanks & giving! Do your part to make our world a better place.

Also, check out:  http://www.nokidhungry.org/

Do you have a health edge in your business? Check out this article and latest research from the Gallup Institute on health and entrepreneurs.

 

 

 

Gallup News: November 13, 2012

In U.S., Entrepreneurs Have Health Edge

But one in four entrepreneurs lack health insurance

by Dan Witters, Sangeeta Agrawal, and Alyssa Brown

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Better health appears to be one of the perks of being an entrepreneur in America. In the U.S., entrepreneurs are less likely than other workers to report having ever been diagnosed with chronic health problems such as high cholesterol, high blood pressure, and diabetes. And they are much less likely to be obese -- 19% vs. 25% -- than other workers.

 

Importantly, the differences between entrepreneurs and other U.S. workers in obesity and in chronic disease rates hold true even after controlling for age, gender, race/ethnicity, region, income, education, marital status, and weekly hours worked. This means that these demographic factors alone don't account for entrepreneurs' physical health dividend; rather, there is something else about being an entrepreneur that relates to having better health.

These findings are based on more than 273,175 interviews conducted Jan. 2, 2011-Sept. 30, 2012, with American adults as a part of the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index. Gallup classified 6,896 of these respondents as entrepreneurs if they self-identified themselves as both "self-employed" and as a "business owner."

Entrepreneurs' Health Habits May Contribute to Lower Chronic Disease Rates
Entrepreneurs report better health habits than other workers, which may be responsible, in part, for the lower chronic disease rates for this group. Entrepreneurs are more likely than other employed adults to say they exercise frequently (60% vs. 54%) or eat fruits and vegetables regularly (61% vs. 55%) and are more likely to say they ate healthy all day "yesterday" (67% vs. 61%). However, smoking rates were about equal among entrepreneurs and other U.S. workers.

Entrepreneurs Much Less Likely to Have Healthcare Necessities
Entrepreneurs seem to be maintaining better health despite lacking basic healthcare necessities. One in four entrepreneurs lack health insurance, contrasting with the one in 10 other workers who are uninsured -- a difference of 15 percentage points. The reason for that difference is not clear, but it could either reflect the high cost of health insurance for individuals and small business owners, or a greater willingness on the part of entrepreneurs to accept the risks inherent in not having health insurance.

In accordance with the higher rate of entrepreneurs who are uninsured, they are more likely than other employed adults to say there have been times in the past 12 months when they did not have enough money to pay for the healthcare or medicine that they or their families needed. Entrepreneurs are also significantly less likely than other workers to say they have visited a dentist in the past year.

Bottom Line
Entrepreneurs are less likely than other employed adults to report having chronic health problems and more likely to report better health behaviors. One possible explanation for these differences may be that the discipline and energy needed for entrepreneurs to start and run their own businesses may also drive them to exercise and eat fruits and vegetables regularly. Alternatively, self-employed adults have the ability to set their own schedules and, thus, may have more flexibility to exercise and plan healthy meals than those who work for an employer.

While entrepreneurs have lower chronic disease rates, they may be more likely to have negative health outcomes from these illnesses because they often lack access to the healthcare and medicine needed to treat them. It is possible that when the main components of the Affordable Care Act -- including the individual mandate and insurance exchanges -- go into effect in 2014, entrepreneurs may become more likely to be able to afford preventative healthcare and medicine. But, until then, this key group -- those who create jobs, launch new products, and innovate -- may be precariously positioned to deal with certain health problems if and when they occur.

To find out how leaders can best support the health and wellbeing of entrepreneurs, read "Attracting Entrepreneurs to Your City" in the Gallup Business Journal.

About the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index
The Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index tracks wellbeing in the U.S., U.K., and Germany and provides best-in-class solutions for a healthier world. To learn more, please visit well-beingindex.com.

Survey MethodsResults are based on telephone interviews conducted as part of the Gallup Healthways Well-Being Index survey Jan. 2, 2011-Sept. 30, 2012, with a random sample of more than 273,175 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. Of these, 6,896 were defined as entrepreneurs.
For results based on the total sample of entrepreneurs, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±1.4 percentage points.
For results based on the total sample of employed non-entrepreneurs, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±0.2 percentage points.
Interviews are conducted with respondents on landline telephones and cellular phones, with interviews conducted in Spanish for respondents who are primarily Spanish-speaking. Each sample includes a minimum quota of 400 cellphone respondents and 600 landline respondents per 1,000 national adults, with additional minimum quotas among landline respondents by region. Landline telephone numbers are chosen at random among listed telephone numbers. Cellphone numbers are selected using random digit dial methods. Landline respondents are chosen at random within each household on the basis of which member had the most recent birthday.
Samples are weighted by gender, age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, education, region, adults in the household, and phone status (cellphone-only/landline only/both, cellphone mostly, and having an unlisted landline number). Demographic weighting targets are based on the March 2011 Current Population Survey figures for the aged 18 and older non-institutionalized population living in U.S. telephone households. All reported margins of sampling error include the computed design effects for weighting and sample design.
In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.
For more details on Gallup's polling methodology, visit http://www.gallup.com/.

What does Fast Food do to your brain?

Fast food meals linked to lower IQ

Press Association – Wed, Oct 3, 2012

Children given more fast food meals will grow up to have a lower IQ than those regularly given freshly-cooked meals, a study has revealed.

According to new research, childhood nutrition has long lasting effects on IQ, even after previous intelligence and socio-economic status are taken into account.

The study at Goldsmiths, University of London, examined whether the type of children's daily main meal had an impact on their cognitive ability and growth.

The results were based on a sample of 4,000 Scottish children aged three to five and found parents of higher socio-economic status reported to give their children meals prepared with fresh ingredients more often, which positively affected their IQ.

Lower socio-economic status was linked to more children having fast food, which led to lower intelligence.

Dr. Sophie Von Stumm, from the department of psychology at Goldsmiths, said: "It's common-sense that the type of food we eat will affect brain development, but previous research has only looked at the effects of specific food groups on children's IQ rather than at generic types of meals.

"This research will go some way to providing hard evidence to support the various high-profile campaigns aimed at reducing the amount of fast food consumed by children in the UK."

Dr. Von Stumm said the findings highlighted that differences in children's meals were also a social problem.

She said: "Mothers and fathers from less privileged backgrounds often have less time to prepare a freshly cooked meal from scratch for their children.

"These children score lower on intelligence tests and often struggle in school. Schools in less privileged areas must do even more to balance children's diet, so that they can achieve their cognitive potential."

To follow-up from the previous article - where you live does affect your health, check out this article about exercise and low income families.


Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index

August 28, 2012

In U.S., Exercise Has Bigger Emotional Payoff for Low-Income

Low-income Americans also reap more gains from healthy eating

by Megan Cochrane and Dan Witters

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Although all Americans report better emotional health when they exercise frequently and eat fruits and vegetables regularly, low-income Americans experience an even bigger emotional boost from practicing these good health habits than do those at higher income levels.

These findings are based on 180,299 interviews with American adults conducted between Jan. 2 and July 8, 2012, as a part of the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index. The Emotional Health Index score is based on Americans' self-reports of positive and negative daily emotions, as well as self-reported clinical diagnoses of depression. Specifically, Americans are asked whether they felt or did "a lot of" each of the following the day before the survey: smiling/laughing, learning/doing something interesting, being treated with respect, enjoyment, happiness, worry, sadness, anger, and stress.
Low-income Americans experience greater improvement across almost all of the items in the Emotional Health Index when they exercise frequently and eat produce regularly than do those who are at a higher income level. For example, low-income adults who exercise three or more days per week are about seven percentage points more likely than their counterparts who exercise less than that to report experiencing happiness "a lot of the day yesterday." This compares to about a four-percentage-point increase for high-income adults who exercise frequently versus those who don't. Low-income Americans experience a bigger exercise "bonus" than do those with higher incomes in terms of daily smiling and laughter, enjoyment, and happiness.
Low-income Americans who exercise frequently also see a greater reduction in daily sadness and clinical diagnoses of depression than do those with higher incomes. However, Americans who exercise frequently at all income levels see an equal decrease is daily worry, and it is actually those making $90,000 or more per year who see the greatest stress reduction from routine exercise.

Similarly, Americans in all income brackets who eat five or more servings of fruits and vegetables at least four days per week see widespread emotional health benefits, but it is particularly evident in those earning less than $36,000 per year. For example, low-income Americans who consume produce regularly are 3.9 points less likely to experience sadness "a lot of the day yesterday" than are their counterparts who don't. But, the reduction in sadness for high-income Americans who consume produce regularly is lower -- a decline of 1.9 points for those with annual incomes of $36,000 to $89,999 and -0.8 points for those making $90,000 or more per year.

Implications
Frequent exercise and healthy eating can help promote positive emotions and reduce stress levels. For low-income Americans these activities are particularly beneficial to their emotional state. They experience an increased emotional boost from exercising and healthy eating when compared to those with higher income levels, although even those who eat right and exercise routinely fail to match the emotional health of their more affluent counterparts.
It's possible that the mood-boosting side effects of exercise and healthy eating make more of a difference for those who experience more uncertainty in meeting basic needs every day. Low-income Americans also more generally report lower levels of positive emotions and higher levels of negative ones than do those with higher incomes, and thus have more room for improvement. Regardless, these results suggest that the ability to access safe places to exercise and affordable produce plays an important role in improving the emotional health of all Americans, particularly for the less wealthy.

About the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index
The Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index tracks wellbeing in the U.S., U.K., and Germany and provides best-in-class solutions for a healthier world. To learn more, please visit well-beingindex.com.

To view and export trend data and for more information on each of the six Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index sub-indexes, please see the following charts: Well-Being Index, Life Evaluation Index, Emotional Health Index, Physical Health Index, Healthy Behavior Index, Work Environment Index, and Basic Access Index.

Survey MethodsResults are based on telephone interviews conducted Jan. 2-July 8, 2012, as part of the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index survey with a random sample of approximately 180,299 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia, selected using random-digit-dial sampling.
For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±0.3 percentage points.
Interviews are conducted with respondents on landline telephones and cellular phones, with interviews conducted in Spanish for respondents who are primarily Spanish-speaking. Each sample includes a minimum quota of 400 cell phone respondents and 600 landline respondents per 1,000 national adults, with additional minimum quotas among landline respondents by region. Landline telephone numbers are chosen at random among listed telephone numbers. Cell phone numbers are selected using random-digit-dial methods. Landline respondents are chosen at random within each household on the basis of which member had the most recent birthday.
Samples are weighted by gender, age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, education, region, adults in the household, and phone status (cell phone only/landline only/both, cell phone mostly, and having an unlisted landline number). Demographic weighting targets are based on the March 2011 Current Population Survey figures for the aged 18 and older non-institutionalized population living in U.S. telephone households. All reported margins of sampling error include the computed design effects for weighting and sample design.
In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.
For more details on Gallup's polling methodology, visit http://www.gallup.com/.

Do you like where you live?

Check out some new studies about overall well-being and where you live. Did you know that where you live can either affect how healthy you are?  It can be the reason why you like to exercise or are packing on the pounds. Read on to learn more:

 

 

 

Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index

October 12, 2012

Americans Who Like Where They Live Are in Better Health

Those who feel good about, safe in their area have fewer health issues

by Lauren Besal and Kyley McGeeney

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Americans who are either satisfied with their community or feel that their community is becoming a better place to live have Physical Health Index scores that are roughly nine points higher than score for Americans who are not satisfied with their communities or feel that their community is becoming a worse place to live.

Specifically, those who are satisfied with the city in which they live or feel that it is becoming a better place to live are less likely to report having experienced physical pain, having health problems, being obese, having headaches, or having ever been diagnosed with asthma or high cholesterol. They are also more likely to report feeling well-rested and having enough energy.

Additionally, adults who say their city is getting better as a place to live are less likely to report having ever been diagnosed with high blood pressure, diabetes, or high cholesterol than those who say their city is getting worse as a place to live. However, residents who are satisfied with their city are no less likely to report these three health issues than those who are dissatisfied.

Of note, these results hold true even when controlling for income, education, and ethnicity -- revealing that individuals' perceptions of their communities are important, regardless of their demographic or socioeconomic situation.
Gallup and Healthways ask 1,000 American adults daily about their physical health and community perceptions as part of the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index. The Physical Health Index includes 18 items, which measure: sick days in the past month, disease burden, health problems that get in the way of normal activities, obesity, feeling well-rested, daily energy, daily colds, daily flu, and daily headaches.
Community Safety Bolsters Physical Health
In addition, Gallup finds that Americans who feel safe while walking alone at night in the city or area where they live are in better physical health than those who do not feel safe doing so. Similarly, those who say they have easy access to a safe place to exercise in the city or area where they live are in better physical health than those who don't.

Support for an Ecological Model of Physical Health
Although income, education, and ethnicity are correlated with health outcomes, tapping into an individual's perceptions about where they live sheds light on community-level factors that may influence the physical health of Americans. While there may be other factors at play here, such as age, the data suggest that there is a relationship between community perceptions and health.
These findings provide support for the ecological model of health, which suggests that one's living conditions, community safety, community development, and civic engagement, among other factors, affect community members' health outcomes. The relationship between community-level perspectives and physical health may have significant implications for urban planning and community improvement efforts, particularly in light of the increase in cardiovascular disease and obesity over the past decade. According to a recent Gallup Business Journal article, U.S. cities with the highest rates of obesity spend approximately $50 million per 100,000 residents to cover the direct costs associated with obesity and related conditions, such as cardiovascular disease.
The American Heart Association suggests that costs to treat cardiovascular disease may triple by 2030. At the same time, the growing trend of childhood obesity will greatly increase the percentage of American adults with cardiovascular disease and related conditions in the coming decades. As policymakers consider solutions to end the epidemic of obesity and bring down its associated healthcare costs in the U.S., discussions about community infrastructure may become increasingly prevalent. Urban planners and local governments can help ensure residents in their cities are not only satisfied with their community, but also have safe places to engage in physical activities.

About the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index
The Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index tracks wellbeing in the U.S., U.K., and Germany and provides best-in-class solutions for a healthier world. To learn more, please visit well-beingindex.com.

Survey MethodsResults are based on telephone interviews conducted as part of the Gallup Healthways Well-Being Index survey Jan. 2-Dec. 29, 2011, with a random sample of 353,492 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.
For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±1 percentage points.
Interviews are conducted with respondents on landline telephones and cellular phones, with interviews conducted in Spanish for respondents who are primarily Spanish-speaking. Each sample includes a minimum quota of 400 cell phone respondents and 600 landline respondents per 1,000 national adults, with additional minimum quotas among landline respondents by region. Landline telephone numbers are chosen at random among listed telephone numbers. Cell phones numbers are selected using random digit dial methods. Landline respondents are chosen at random within each household on the basis of which member had the most recent birthday.
Samples are weighted by gender, age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, education, region, adults in the household, and phone status (cell phone-only/landline only/both, cell phone mostly, and having an unlisted landline number). Demographic weighting targets are based on the March 2011 Current Population Survey figures for the aged 18 and older non-institutionalized population living in U.S. telephone households. All reported margins of sampling error include the computed design effects for weighting and sample design.
In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.
For more details on Gallup's polling methodology, visit http://www.gallup.com/.

Do you know what your employees want?

Check out these articles, by various sources, which give insights into employee engagement.  The first article, from Time Business, reveals why employees stay with a job/company.  Do you know why employees leave jobs or decide to stay in their current jobs?

 

In the second article – did you know that stress can actually diminish creativity? Or even reduce that competitive edge to help companies be innovated?

 

What Makes Employees Want to Stay

By Paul Shread | September 6, 2012 | 1

 

If you’ve gone through the effort to hire the right people for the job, you want them to stay. So what makes employees want to stick around?

 

According to a recent “Workforce Retention Survey” by the American Psychological Association, today’s professionals seek a broad range of positive qualities from their companies, which isn’t surprising when you consider that they spend the majority of their waking hours at work. Women and older workers are much more likely to cite reasons such as job satisfaction and work-life balance for staying in a job, while men are more motivated by money.

 

David Ballard, who heads the Psychologically Healthy Workplace Program, notes that “top employers create an environment where employees feel connected to the organization and have a positive work experience that’s part of a rich, fulfilling life.”

 

Two-thirds of employees stay with a job because they enjoy what they do, although work-life balance matters too. Good benefits and pay help, as do positive relationships with co-workers.

The bottom line: If you want employees to stay, create a positive, fulfilling environment for them. Money helps, but it’s not the only thing motivating much of the workforce.

Adapted from What Workers Want to Stay at Their Job at Baseline Magazine.

Read more: http://business.time.com/2012/09/06/what-makes-employees-want-to-stay/#ixzz28jpjxzVo

 

 

Employee Brain on Stress Can Quash Creativity & Competitive Edge

ForbesWoman

9/05/2012 @ 11:22PM |16,397 views

Judy Martin, Contributor

+ Comment now

Brain structures involved in dealing with stress and fear. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

Right to the point. “Work stress is a major problem,” David Ballard PsyD, told me recently in an e-mail exchange. He heads up the American Psychological Association’s Psychologically Healthy Workplace Program.

Workplace stress is not news. But how companies are handling the issue is worth a gander. As I wrote in a recent Forbes post, a recent APA study found only 58 percent of employees said they have the resources necessary to manage stress. Furthermore, a 2012 SHRM (Society for Human Resource Management) survey found only 11 percent of organizations have specific stress reduction programs in place.

Move up http://i.forbesimg.com tMove down

 “Even those organizations that do have stress management programs generally focus on individual-level training and resources to help stressed-out employees,” says Ballard, “but they neglect preventive and organizational-level approaches that may be more effective in the long run.”

Your Brain on Stress

With more than forty percent of American workers reporting chronic workplace stress, the long-term impact of stress and its influence on the human creative condition and business can be detrimental, says Rick Hanson PhD, a California based neuropsychologist and author of Just One Thing: Developing a Buddha Brain One Simple Practice at a Time.

“As ten-thousand studies have shown, when you are chronically stressed, you’re less able to be at your best. Particularly when you’re talking about a knowledge economy which really places a high premium on creativity,” Hanson told me via Skype.

Chronic stress degrades a long list of capabilities with regard to creativity and innovation, notes Hanson. It’s harder to think outside of the box, nimbleness and dexterity take a hit, and the response to sudden change is more difficult to manage. Hanson has been examining the impact of stress on the brain and well-being, while working in the trenches in corporate America and as the co-founder of The Wellspring Institute for Neuroscience and Contemplative Wisdom.

Hanson explains, stress is like fine sand being drizzled into the brain. It might keep working, but if you dump enough sand in there, it’ll freeze up at some point. Beyond heading into the deep freeze, he says neuroscience is now showing us that the cumulative consequences of stress can be a dire thorn in the side of business innovation.

Your Brain at Work

“Even a small amount of stress is noisy in the brain,” says leadership consultant, David Rock, the author of Your Brain at Work and the co-founder of the NeuroLeadership Institute. The organization partnered on a survey of 6000 workers, and found that only ten percent of people do their best thinking at work. Expanded technology, multitasking and a competitively demanding (or threatening) company culture, can add to the noise in the brain which crushes creativity.

“Threat makes you productive, but not necessarily effective. It can make you productive if you don’t have to think broadly, widely or deeply,” says Rock. “A threat response, which we might think of as stress, increases motor function, while it decreases perception, cognition and creativity.”

Ultimately, on the surface, stress might seem a good kick starter for productivity. But getting the creative juices flowing has more to do with the engagement of the employee and his or her disposition, notes Rock.

“What neuroscience is telling us, is that creativity and engagement are essentially about making people happier,” explains Rock who adds, “It’s what is called, a “toward state” in the brain.” In that “state,” Rock explains, workers feel curious, open minded, happier and interested in what they are doing.Move up http://i.forbesimg.com tMove down

A huge component of creating that state is to quiet the mind, and that means reducing stress. Rock discusses the neuroscience behind stress reduction here in my recent post at WorkLifeNation.com, Neuroscience Might Be New “it-strategy” to Boost Employee Creativity.

In my experience covering workplace issues for well over a decade, stress management programs in most companies, if they exist at all, are more of an ancillary stepchild in the wellness agenda. As David Ballard PhD told me, workplace flexibility, mental healthcare coverage and on-site fitness offerings certainly help to reduce stress, but it’s not enough. Perhaps a company will do more to help employees better manage stress, if the end-game is a more creative and engaged employee.

What do you think? Should companies be doing more to help employees manage stress?

 

 

How do you Manage?

Checkout this Blog by CAPP - Center for Applied Positive Psychology. Do you think you can improve your leadership skills by considering what your employees want from you? How can you incorporate positive change into your day to encourage your employees?




What Do Employees Want from Their Managers?

Posted: 08 Oct 2012 04:22 AM PDT

Posted by: Reena Jamnadas & Emma Trenier

Whatever our role or level in an organisation, we all have high expectations of our bosses. In particular, we want them to understand our strengths and preferences and tailor their approach to our needs – this came across loud and clear from the 1180 respondents in Capp’s recent Ideal Manager Survey.

We also place enormous value in this relationship working positively for us – a miserable, ineffective relationship with their line manager is the most common reason behind an employee’s decision to leave a company.

The results of Capp’s Ideal Manager Survey showed that 90% of employees disagreed that all managers should manage in the same way. This appreciation of diverse management styles was also shown in the breadth and range of strengths which employees thought were important for their managers.

Notwithstanding this, we see that employees most commonly want their managers to have the following strengths:

• Mission: Providing a sense of meaning and purpose, always working towards a longer-term goal;

• Enabler: Focused on creating the right conditions for people to grow and develop for themselves;

• Personal Responsibility: Taking ownership of their decisions and holding themselves accountable for what they do;

• Humility: Happy for others to share the credit for their team’s successes;

• Esteem Builder: Able to help people believe in themselves and see what they are capable of achieving.

Do any of these strengths surprise you? Perhaps not, as this simple profile paints a picture of a trusted individual who leads through a combination of clear vision, personal commitment and a focus on developing others.

How can you develop these characteristics within your management style? Here are our five top tips:

• Create a sense of purpose: Understand what drives each of your team members and gives them a sense of meaning in their work. As you delegate work, help individuals to see how it relates to this wider sense of meaning. In practice: this means spending time talking about context before focusing on detail.

• Role model responsibility: If you want your team to develop their personal responsibility, choose a handful of areas in which you will actively demonstrate how you do this yourself. In practice: as well as taking responsibility yourself, take responsibility for training your team to do the same.

• Share successes: Recognise the culture and climate that you want to build within your team. If it is one of shared ownership and collaboration, then seek to share team successes in ways that credentialise others. In practice: share credit with others in a range of ways including public praise, copying senior managers into positive feedback emails, and thanking individuals one to one.

• Give specific positive feedback: Think about providing positive feedback just as carefully as giving ‘constructive’ feedback. Let people know what they have done well and what you would like them to keep doing. In practice: give specific, targeted feedback, along with evidence, when you see great work.

• Set your team up to succeed: Find opportunities to stretch each person in your team and provide the autonomy for them to take full ownership. In practice: identify each person’s strengths so that you align opportunities to these strengths and can be sure the opportunity will provide a positive stretch.

By managing in this way, you’ll be taking important to steps to delivering your employees what they want, in turn helping you to deliver the performance you need.

More about women....

Are Women Happier than men?

 

Blog Post by: Positive Acorn ~ www.positiveacorn.com
Posted By: Robert Biswas-Diener
Posted on: September 11, 2012
Welcome to the Good Life!
The Latest in Positive Psychology


Are women Happier than men?

2 weeks ago a landmark study was published in which a team of researchers identified a gene associated with happiness in women. The researchers worked with 152 men and 193 women, in racial and socioeconomic proportions that resemble the overall make-up of the USA. From this group they sampled happiness and saliva (from which they were able to analyze, and double check, genetic factors).

The researchers discovered the genetic marker MAOA-L was associated with happiness in women but not in men. MAOA-L resides on the x chromosome, and because women have two x chromosomes where men have an x and a y women are able to have a double marker whereas men can have one at the most. The research team found that women with two markers for MAOA-L (about 17% of women) were significantly happier than those women who had only one who were-in turn-significantly happier than those women who did not have this gene.

This is a major breakthrough because it is a step closer to understanding happiness at the genetic level. It is also interesting because in men MAOA-L is known as the "warrior gene." That's right, in men this same gene is directly associated with impassivity, aggression and anti-social personality traits.
A best guess-based on research-- about why these sex differences emerge: This genetic marker is activated by estrogen, a female hormone and affects the way the brain uses serotonin, a neurotransmitter closely associated with pleasurable feelings. For both men and women, however, it appears that this genetic marker interacts with early life experiences such that it makes people hypersensitive, fearful and-as a result-more aggressive. This trend is particularly pronounced in men, likely because MAOA-L interacts with the male hormone testosterone.

The take home message is that in the absence of life stresses women have a genetic advantage where happiness is concerned. This pans out in other research on happiness: Although sex differences account for only about 1% of happiness, there are large sex differences in the intensity of happiness. Women report higher highs and are more likely to say that they are "very happy" (as opposed to "moderately happy") than are men. See the CBS 2 minute video here: http://tinyurl.com/9bqnd7x