Whistle While You Work? Happiness May Hurt Productivity

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


If work gives you the blues, you might want to ask for a raise on the basis that you're probably more productive than happy coworkers. At least that's what Robert Sinclair and Carrie Lavis of the University of Alberta have recently concluded from four different studies. Their findings will be presented at a meeting of the Canadian Psychological Association this June.

The researchers tried to measure the effect of moods on productivity by testing happy and sad people as they assembled circuit boards. It turned out that sad people were far better builders. The scientists suggest that perhaps sad people concentrate harder on their work because it takes their minds off of whatever makes them sad. In contrast, the happy people don't want to be distracted from bliss.

So does that mean employers should make their workforce miserable to boost efficiency? Not quite. The key message of the study, Sinclair says, is that organizations should realize that employees' emotions influence their performance (no great surprise there). He also suggests that employers should create situations in which employees feel that doing their jobs will make them feel good. Stock options anyone?

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe