New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Adversity Is Linked to Life Satisfaction

A certain amount of negative life events is correlated with an overall sense of life satisfaction and happiness. Christie Nicholson reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Adversity is a bad thing right? It means stress and we know stress is no good for our mental and physical health. But we also hear that adversity brings resilience. What does not kill us makes us stronger, as it were.  

A multiyear study of nearly 2,400 surveyed subjects found that those who experienced negative life events reported better mental health and overall well-being than those who did not. The study is published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

Negative events included serious illness, violence, bereavement, social stress, relationship stress, and disasters like fires, floods, etc.  


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.


So those who had zero negative life events experienced more overall stress and lower life satisfaction. And here’s the rub: Those who experienced a high number of stressful negative events also reported greater stress.

It seems there’s a sweet spot, where a certain amount of struggle is good and produces a toughness and sense of control over one’s life, but anything above or below that amount is correlated with the inverse:  Distress, anxiety, and feelings of being overwhelmed.

While the authors note that its impossible to identify this sweet spot of adversity, their research suggests that around two to three events might provide the ideal amount of protection from future stress and unhappiness. Yet they are careful to note they are not endorsing anyone to go out and purposely induce a negative life event.

—Christie Nicholson

 

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe