Daydreaming Diminishes Happiness

People reported being happiest when engaged in what they were doing versus allowing their minds to wander. Karen Hopkin reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Ah, daydreaming. Is there anything more pleasant than sitting back and letting your thoughts drift? Well, yes: not letting your thoughts drift, for one. Because according to a study published in the journal Science, people are least happy when their minds wander. [M. Killingsworth and Daniel Gilbert, "A Wandering Mind Is an Unhappy Mind"]

Humans, to a degree unmatched by other animals, are capable of thinking about things outside the here and now—something that happened yesterday, or something they hope will happen tomorrow. It’s that sort of itinerant intellect that allows us to plan and to learn. But at what cost?

Psychologists at Harvard used an iPhone app to find out. At random times throughout the day, the program asked some 2,200 participants what they were doing, what they were thinking about and how they felt. Turns out that people spend nearly half their waking hours thinking about something other than what they’re doing. And that whether and where their thoughts tend to stray is a better predictor of their feelings than what they’re actually up to. The scientists conclude that a wandering mind is an unhappy mind.


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 try to focus on, and live in, the present. You might discover that happiness is just being where it’s happening.

—Karen Hopkin

[The above text is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

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