No abstract

As the science of wellbeing has grown, universities have adopted the challenge of prioritizing the wellbeing of students. Positive psychology interventions (PPIs), activities designed to increase the frequency of positive emotions and experiences, which help to facilitate the use of actions and thoughts that lead to human flourishing, are being increasingly used worldwide. Known to boost wellbeing and a number of other variables, it nonetheless remains unknown whether their use can influence other variables in non-Western cultures. In this study, we determined the impact of PPIs on a variety of wellbeing outcomes. The 6-week PPI program was conducted in the United Arab Emirates on Emirati university students (n = 120) who reported more positive emotion and overall balance of feelings that favored positivity over time relative to a control group. Yet, there was no effect found on negative emotions, life satisfaction, perceived stress, fear of happiness, locus of control, or somatic symptoms, and no effect on levels of collectivism or individualism. Our findings nonetheless support the use of PPIs in higher education as they show an increase in the experience of positive emotion, with this in itself bringing positive life outcomes, and no negative impact on culture. Our findings serve to build a foundation for understanding for whom PPIs work best -and least -around the world.

As public consciousness of sexism is increasing in the workplace (e.g., #MeToo movement), labeling oneself as an ally (e.g., UN HeforShe campaign) is becoming more socially desirable for men. However, do women agree with such men in their assessments of being allies? In particular, how do women’s perspectives of men’s allyship affect their own inclusion-relevant outcomes? Using a multi-informant design and data from 101 men-women colleague pairs, this study considered men’s self-perceptions and women’s other-reports of men’s key allyship-relevant characteristics - justice, moral courage, emotional intelligence, civility, and allyship. Polynomial regression and response surface analyses revealed differential impacts of (in)congruence between men’s and women’s perceptions on women’s sense of inclusion and vitality. Simply, when women perceived men as higher (or the same) in justice, moral courage, emotional intelligence, and civility than men reported themselves, it positively predicted women’s outcomes. This suggests that humble self-presentation by men on characteristics that are parallel to allyship (but not allyship) may be ideal. Yet, both under- and over-estimation by men on allyship itself predicted poorer outcomes for women, suggesting that the ideal is for men to have an accurate assessment of their own strengths and weaknesses as an ally.

Warren, and Natalie Sappleton for their invaluable feedback on previous drafts of this manuscript.