by Steve Rose | Sep 29, 2014 | Veterans in Transition
As an eighteen-year-old kid, the military gives you a sense of purpose,
It give you a sense of responsibility that you don’t usually get at eighteen.
At thirty-five I have to be my five-year-old self all over again,
“What do you want to be when you grow up?’”
Trying to find my place; who am I? Where am I going to go? What am I going to do now?
You don’t have an answer for who you are, you’re just kind of a lost soul.
The military is like your parents,
You’re taught how to behave, how to look, how to react to things.
You don’t have that military conscience on your shoulder anymore,
Now I just have to be accountable to myself, and that’s a problem.
I found it easier to think on my feet for eight guys than it is to organize my day-to-day here.
There were rules in the army, there was a reason for people to do better and to be better.
Everything is so black and white when you’re in the military,
Do something wrong, you get jacked up hard,
In the civilian-world,“something got missed? Oh well, we’ll get it next time,”
To me that’s like “what? Get it next time?”
I came from an environment where sometimes there is no next time,
You do this right or that’s it, somebody fucking dies.
The military is an F-1 racecar in comparison to the company I am at now,
Going from working in a high-performance team to working in a B team or a C team.
I would walk out of meetings going, “that was two hours of god-damn time wasted,”
I work really long hours, but that’s our commitment, that’s our dedication.
I find meaning working with a bunch of people that are motivated, driven, and ambitious,
That’s what I had in Afghanistan.
It’s hard to care about things you should care about in civilian life,
There was just an overwhelming sense that nothing mattered.
I felt like that was the pentacle of my life,
And now you’re supposed to find something else and find new meaning?
I wondered whether my life would be better if I were dead than alive,
I wondered whether my best days were behind me.
The most difficult thing is knowing that I can’t go back.
I don’t necessarily miss being blown up and shot at,
But I miss the sense of purpose that comes with combat.
Beyond your paycheck, you get paid psychologically in the military,
…a sense of purpose, focus, comradare, mission, and all those kinds of things,
There’s a lot of people that would just do it for the psychological payoff but no money.
You’re used to doing things that mattered,
Now suddenly your life is simply digesting bullshit and consuming instead.
”Inextinguishable thirst is constantly renewed torture…
…this race for an unattainable goal can give no other pleasure but that of the race itself,
Once it is interrupted the participants are left empty-handed.”*
*This piece is comprised of the voices of roughly 30 Canadian Veterans of Afghanistan. Quotes were thematically extracted from my interviews and lines were pieced together to form the above narrative. The final quote is from Durkheim’s book, Suicide, in his chapter on Anomie. I also want to say thank-you to the Canadian Veterans who gave their time and insight in the interviews.
by Steve Rose | Apr 15, 2014 | Identity, Purpose, and Belonging
“No living being can be happy or even exist unless his needs are sufficiently proportioned to his means.”
– Émile Durkheim
Émile Durkheim, one of the founding fathers of sociology, has developed a reputation as being dry, detached, or no longer relevant in light of the trendy post-structural theorists. I used to think this as well until I read his book, Suicide. Before I knew it, I was hooked on Durkheim. Parts of his work can be extremely engaging and many of his critiques are more relevant today than ever before!
In his discussion of ‘anomie’, Durkheim states that the key to happiness is having our needs proportionate to our means. According to Durkheim, our “needs” are our desires. As humans, our desires are infinite and insatiable, unless regulated by social forces. Our “means” are the ability to achieve our goals to satisfy our desire.
Contrary to the modern idea that breaking free from social restraint will contribute to our happiness, Durkheim argues the exact opposite. Freedom from social restraint would place an individual in an environment of constant disappointment since their unlimited desires would infinitely surpass their means. Durkheim states:
Unlimited desires are insatiable by definition and insatiability is rightly considered a sign of morbidity. Being unlimited, they constantly and infinitely surpass the means at their command; they cannot be quenched. Inextinguishable thirst is constantly renewed torture…. To pursue a goal which is by definition unattainable is to condemn oneself to a state of perpetual unhappiness.’’
Worthy goals must be provided by social regulations that act as signposts to human action. Without socially sanctioned signposts regulating our actions, individuals seek constant stimulation, forever disappointed by the result, or succumb to a feeling of lost hopelessness. Durkheim writes:
All man’s pleasure in acting, moving and exerting himself implies the sense that his efforts are not in vain and that by walking he has advanced. However, one does not advance when one walks toward no goal, or—which is the same thing—when his goal is infinity.
Durkheim’s emphasis on the sense that by walking one has advanced, anticipates more recent research on the psychology of self-efficacy.
According to Albert Bandura, self-efficacy is:
“…the belief in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to manage prospective situations.”
The feeling that one has advanced contributes to a sense of self-efficacy by reinforcing one’s ability to effectively work toward goals and gain mastery over the challenges one faces. Although progress toward one’s goals is self-generated, the goals themselves are not.
Durkheim’s major emphasis on the social nature of our goals is key to understanding the unique contribution of Durkheim’s sociological insight on happiness.
Consider any worth-while goal or endeavor and you will quickly realize it is marked by the stamp of social values. From hunting and gathering, to developing android apps, our goals are regulated by what is deemed valuable to a particular social context.
In The Division of Labour in a chapter titled, “The Progress of the Division of Labor and of Happiness,” Durkheim dispels the myth that the average happiness of a society increases as civilization develops. In the language of his time, he states:
“The normal savage can be quite as happy as the normal civilized man.”
This is the case because as stated before, happiness is not the expansion of desires through freedom from social regulation, but rather, it is the opposite: having one’s means proportionate to one’s socially tempered desires, providing a sense of purpose and progress toward these goals.
In line with his demeanor, Durkheim believed happiness is a serious endeavor. Although play is necessary, it does not contribute to long-term happiness since it only provides temporary pleasure. He states:
“The need of playing, acting without end and for the pleasure of acting, cannot be developed beyond a certain point without depriving oneself of serious life.”
The problem with “depriving oneself of serious life” is that it detaches an individual from the pursuit of the collective goals that keep the desires in check.
As stated above, these desires must be kept in check so that the individual feels connected to society and gains a sense that they are progressing. Durkheim reverses the idea that happiness depends on pleasure by stating pleasure depends on happiness:
But it appears fairly certain that happiness is something besides a sum of pleasures…Pleasure is local; it is a limited affection of a point in the organism or conscience… In short, what happiness expresses is not the momentary state of a particular function, but the health of physical and moral life in its entirety… Most often, on the contrary, pleasure depends upon happiness.
Durkheim anticipates a great deal of research on happiness in positive psychology.
Studies in positive psychology demonstrate that happiness is more like a thermostat than a savings account when it comes to stimulation. One study demonstrates how the happiness of lottery winners returns to a baseline after a period of time, showing they are no happier than a control group.
This is how the “normal civilized man,” with all his opportunity for stimulation can be just as happy as “the normal savage,” according to Durkheim. Happiness does not come from individual stimulation, it comes from an attachment to one’s society through meaningful social regulations.
In a world of ever-decreasing regulation, how can individuals find happiness?
Durkheim’s answer is that individuals need to specialize in a specific occupation they are suited for. In hunter-gatherer societies this role was provided to us directly, in feudal societies it was inherited, but in modern times it must be sought after and discovered. With ever-expanding opportunities, Durkheim emphasized the need for specialization:
We can then say that, in higher societies, our duty is not to spread our activity over a large surface, but to concentrate and specialize it. We must contract our horizon, choose a definite task and immerse ourselves in it completely.
In summary, happiness is not the escape from restriction or the accumulation of pleasures. Rather, it is found in social regulation through the pursuit of socially determined goals.
Pleasures are fleeting, leaving us, in time, back at a happiness-baseline. The threat of anomic unhappiness can be avoided by the sense that one progresses by engaging in social action.
Social action in modern times is extremely diverse and highly specialized, requiring individuals to seek out a specific occupational endeavor, whether it be developing a specific product, advocating for a specific cause, or caring for others in a specific fashion.
by Steve Rose | Apr 9, 2014 | Veterans in Transition
Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) has become a familiar and frequently used concept in recent years. Although PTSD is a major issue faced by our returning troops, it has become somewhat of an umbrella term we often jump to when considering psychological injuries in the military and veteran population.
So what are some of the lesser-known issues veterans face in transition? These consist of moral injury, transitional stress, and sanctuary trauma.
It is important to differentiate these issues faced by veterans from PTSD. If we view every issue, we miss out on the complexity of the problem.
What is PTSD?
In the DSM-5, PTSD is conceptualized as, “exposure to actual or threatened death, serious injury or sexual violation.” This exposure then produces prolonged distressing symptoms in the individual such as nightmares, flashbacks, or hyper-vigilance. The key distinguishing factor is that PTSD is closely related to a fear response tied to the fight or flight instincts.
Moral Injury
Beyond PTSD, moral injury focuses on trauma to the moral conscience. Two major definitions have emerged:
Brett Litz defines moral injury as “perpetrating, failing to prevent, bearing witness to, or learning about acts that transgress deeply held moral beliefs and expectations.”
This may occur in a high steaks situation where one is forced to make a decision they may believe is right at the time, but may later come to realize the decision had negative unintended negative consequences.
For example, if a vehicle fails to stop, one may suspect it is an enemy threat, requiring one to take out the target. After the decision is made, one may come to learn the vehicle was actually occupied by an innocent civilian family.
Although the individual cannot be blamed for this action, it becomes a moral injury when the person suffers intense shame and unresolved grief.
This is not the only form of moral injury.
Jonathan Shay, in Odysseus in America, defines moral injury as stemming from the “betrayal of ‘what’s right’ in a high-stakes situation by someone who holds power.”
This includes a sense of institutional betrayal. For Example, an individual may feel betrayed by a superior, or the military institution as a whole, if they come to learn that the mission they were ordered to carry out actually resulted in the destruction of an innocent village.
Both forms of moral injury shatter a person’s worldview, causing a profound sense of shame and isolation. This is different than PTSD because moral injury does not rely on a fear response. Rather, it relies on a betrayal of our humanity.
Here is a comparison between PTSD and moral injury symptoms as presented in a recent series on moral injury in the Huffington Post:
As depicted, moral injury is marked by the highly evolved human emotions of grief and shame. PTSD relies on the more primitive emotion of fear, governing the fight or flight response.
For example, a dog can develop PTSD if it is traumatized. It is more difficult to give a dog moral injury. A dog may experience temporary guilt for a wrongdoing, but it is hard to imagine a scenario where this guilt would turn into long-term shame.
Human beings are highly social creatures and these moral emotions govern our connection to the social realm. Shame isolates us by destroying our sense of being a valuable person. Betrayal isolates us by destroying our sense of trust.
Transitional Stress
This is not a very popular concept, but it is something that I’ve found accurately depicts the unique challenges many veterans face upon reintegrating into civilian life.
In my research, I’ve found that veterans often experience a stressful transition to civilian life due to the cultural differences they encounter.
In my interviews with Canadian Veterans, I found six common themes: missing the military; feeling lost and apathetic in civilian life; feeling cut off from an elite family; difficulty connecting with civilians; the loss of structure; and the loss of a sense of service.
This sentiment is evident in Jessie Odom’s memoir, Through Our Eyes:
“the most devastating perpetual trauma I had to overcome was civilian transition… I know the changes I see in myself are not a result of the war in Iraq. Even though those memories are still there and are traumatic, it goes much deeper than that. The changes are the result of a man who wishes he was at war.”
Canadian psychologists with the Veterans Transition Program have referred to the problem as a “reverse culture shock” (Westwood, Black, and McLean 2002). Veterans speak of losing their closely bonded “military family” upon leaving the forces and experience a sense of identity disorientation as they attempt to navigate within an unfamiliar civilian world.
From a sociological perspective, transitional trauma is a form of ‘anomie’. Anomie is a concept used by Sociologist Émile Durkheim to describe a society lacking moral regulation.
An anomic society lacks the moral signposts that guide individuals throughout their life-course, leaving them without direction to pursue collective goals. In this sense, it is closely tied to moral injury.
Rather than alienation resulting from an individual committing a moral offense resulting in self-blame, alienation results when the individual cannot reintegrate into a relatively loosely regulated society that doesn’t provide the same clear sense of purpose and regulation found in the military.
Sanctuary Trauma
Sanctuary trauma is a concept developed by Dr. Steven Silver: “[It] occurs when an individual who suffered a severe stressor next encounters what was expected to be a supportive and protective environment’ and discovers only more trauma.” Although this concept is under-recognized, a Canadian veteran is demonstrating its current relevance.
Bruce Moncur wrote a recent article in the Huffington Post expressing that fighting veteran affairs is like fighting the Taliban. He attributes at least half of his trauma to navigating the vicissitudes of veteran affairs. Sanctuary trauma comes from a feeling of abandonment, the feeling that one was merely used and thrown away when becoming injured. As stated in my post on Canada’s ‘sacred obligation’ to veterans, this was reinforced by the meeting with the former Veteran Affairs Minister, Julian Fantino, that went “off the rails.”
The sacred obligation goes beyond a legal contract; it is a covenant made by a society to care for those who served in an unlimited capacity. The major difference between a covenant and a contract is this level of liability. Contracts only hold parties liable to a degree limited by the terms and conditions of the contract, whereas covenants hold parties liable to an unlimited degree.
Christopher Coker, in The Warrior Ethos, describes the covenant as distinguished from the contract in three ways: “First, they are not limited to specific conditions and circumstances; secondly, they tend to be open-ended and long-lasting; and, thirdly, they rarely involve individual advantage.” What he is describing is the warrior’s covenant.
In the Canadian Armed Forces, the warrior’s covenant is characterized by “unlimited liability” – as described in Duty With Honour. This means that “members accept and understand that they are subject to being lawfully ordered into harm’s way under conditions that could lead to the loss of their lives.”
Accepting unlimited liability, serving members enter into a sacred covenant based in an altruistic commitment to self-sacrifice if required by the mission. In A Soldier’s Contract, Tom Martineau states:
“…then I come back, and you [the government] treat me like a piece of shit… I stuck up to my part of the bargain; I signed a contract saying what I was going to do, and I did it.”
Sanctuary trauma compounds the issues of war traumas, exacerbating feelings of isolation and hopelessness. For many embittered veterans, this is a feeling of institutional betrayal.
Conclusion
Veterans experience forms of trauma beyond PTSD. New labels allow researchers and mental health practitioners to more accurately pinpoint the source of the issue. By knowing the source of the issue, better solutions can be provided.
Treatments for PTSD may include forms of cognitive-behavioral therapy. Treatments for moral injury may include existential/ spiritual counseling. Solutions for transitional stress may be sought in group therapy, programs that teach entrepreneurial skills, or occupational groups that provide individuals with a new sense of mission. As for sanctuary trauma, the solution is ensuring returning veterans feel they are cared for upon their return.
by Steve Rose | Feb 27, 2014 | Identity, Purpose, and Belonging
On the go? Listen to the audio version of the article here:
“Those who have a ‘why’ to live can bear with almost any ‘how.'”
― Viktor E. Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning
What is the most basic human need?
Maslow’s famous hierarchy of needs has been a popular answer to this question. Maslow states a sense of safety and security is our most basic need, aside from food and sleep.
Although Maslow’s theory has its merits, there are many examples of individuals who thrive despite not having these needs met.
Throughout my research with veterans, I talked to many who thrived amidst the chaos of combat.
On the other hand, I’ve also come across many individuals who live in the safest and most secure environments but experience a great deal of despair.
Because of this, there must be something more important than the need for safety and security.
I believe the most important basic need is our need to be needed.
What is this need to be needed?
The need to be needed is an individual’s sense of significance rooted in the sense of being part of a community or cause beyond themselves.
The need to be needed is one of our fundamental desires. We want to feel significant in the eyes of others, even if it is only one other person. We want to feel like we play an important role, whether in an organization, family, or life of another.
The need to be needed is rooted in our need for a sense of contribution to something beyond ourselves.
When this need is unfulfilled in the case of job loss, divorce, or significant life-transitions, we may find ourselves beginning to lack a sense of contribution.
When this sense of contribution goes away, we lose a sense of purpose and direction.
If you or someone you know is struggling with mental health issues, you can check out my resource page for suggestions on how to find help.
Let’s look take a closer look at how major life transitions affect our need to be needed.
Veterans in transition to civilian life can teach us a great deal about this topic.
The Need to be Needed in the Military
My argument that belonging is more important than safety and security comes from my research on veterans in transition to civilian life.
Many soldiers in combat flourish while knowing they could be killed at any moment. Sebastian Junger, in his book War, writes:
“It’s as if there was an intoxicating effect to group inclusion that more than compensated for the dangers the group had to face.”
Individuals in the combat unit rely on one another to fulfill a specific duty. Each person experiences the highest degree of being needed because their role is essential to the success of a mission.
Compare the high degree of being needed within a combat unit to the prospects facing a recent veteran. Veterans transition to a civilian environment that is much safer, but often fails to provide them with a sense being needed. Rather than flourishing, many begin a downward spiral into despair and suicidal thoughts.
Besides the lack of job prospects in general, employers often fail to recognize how a veteran’s skills can be valuable in a civilian role, and veterans may experience difficulties translating their professional military experience in an interview for a civilian position.
If you’re interested in exploring some life-lessons I’ve discovered in my in-depth discussions with veterans, you can check out my article, 6 Things Veterans Can Teach Us About Life.
When the Need to be Needed is Unhealthy
Although we need to feel needed, we need to be mindful if this turns into a form of addiction. Addiction to the need to be needed can also be called codependency.
Codependency occurs when our desire to contribute stems from a sense of not being enough. We are no longer human beings; we become human doings.
Every basic need has a dark side.
Our basic need for food can turn into an addiction, our need for safety and security can turn into anxiety and obsession, and our need for self-esteem can turn into narcissism.
The dark side of these needs comes from an attempt to fill an inner void with an external substance or behavior.
If our need to be needed is not met, we may overcompensate for our lack of love and belonging by trying to gain acceptance through continually doing things for others.
There are many different forms of codependency, but the most common is enabling someone with addiction by continually doing things for them to keep everything together. This form of “helping” is often an attempt to gain a sense of love.
In reality, the codependent person is operating in a state of complete self-neglect. Their self-worth and identity quickly erode into nothing. This sense of emptiness further fuels the addiction to helping others, giving gifts, or generally attempting to gain a sense of significance.
If this resonates with you and you want to learn how to be more effective in your attempts to help others, check out my article, When Does Helping Become Enabling?
In that article, I present an in-depth distinction between helping and codependent enabling, particularly when helping someone with an addiction. Helping allows you to be the most effective version of yourself in your relationships with others, whereas enabling keeps you trapped in this unhealthy dynamic.
The key to recovering from codependency is developing personal boundaries and starting to focus on self-care. Over time, a person suffering from codependency may build a sense of identity and self-esteem.
Conclusion
We are social beings, and our need to be needed is rooted in this reality.
We can fulfill this need in healthy ways, so long as we maintain personal boundaries, engage in self-care, and have a foundation of self-worth.
We can fulfill our need to be needed when we find a way to make ourselves useful within our social context.
On a public policy level, we need to consider ways to reduce the impact of life transitions on our need to be needed.
Problematic life transitions could include students in transition to the work-world, retirees transitioning out of their profession, veterans in transition to civilian life, professional athletes leaving their sport, and priests retiring from their role.
Humans are fundamentally social creatures, and when our social needs are met, we feel a sense of belonging and purpose.
If you’re interested in learning more about how to build a sense of purpose, you can check out my article here: What Does It Mean to Have a Purpose?
by Steve Rose | Jan 11, 2014 | Identity, Purpose, and Belonging
On the go? Listen to the audio version of the article here:
I’ve always been interested in what drives human behavior. This question has probably been the main driver throughout my studies.
I have spent the last decade trying to answer this question and have discovered some important facts about what makes us tick.
So what drives human behavior?
The drive to fulfill the need for a sense of significance, achieved through a perceived sense of control over one’s life, a sense of social belonging, and a sense of effective social contribution.
Simply put, this means we all want to feel significant. This sense of significance is achieved through feeling like we belong and feeling like we are making a contribution.
When this is achieved, we feel fulfilled. When it is not, we feel the need to compensate for this lack of inner-fulfillment.
What is the science behind this theory?
According to self-determination theory, there are three underlying human needs: autonomy, relatedness, and competence
Autonomy is the sense that we have a level of control over our lives and are able to make our own free decisions. This can also be called a sense of freedom.
Relatedness refers to the idea that although we have a level of freedom and individuality, we still need to feel connected to something beyond ourselves. This can also be called a sense of community.
Competence is the sense that we are able to develop a level of skill or mastery over an area, allowing us to use these skills to contribute something valuable to the broader society.
According to Edward L. Deci and Richard Ryan, these three fundamental needs drive intrinsic motivation. This is a humanistic perspective in positive psychology.
This theory goes beyond simply looking at rewards and punishments, as was popularized by B.F. Skinner in his theory of Operant Conditioning.
Although rewards and punishments do affect our habits, they are only extrinsic motivators. Human beings are more powerfully driven by the intrinsic motivators outlined in self-determination theory.
In their research, Deci and Ryan state:
Perhaps no single phenomenon reflects the positive potential of human nature as much as intrinsic motivation, the inherent tendency to seek out novelty and challenges, to extend and exercise one’s capacities, to explore, and to learn.
This perspective considers the active nature of human beings and their desire to expand their abilities. It expands on Skinner’s perspective on conditioning which frames human beings as equivalent to dogs that can be trained through external reward and punishment.
Although both drive human behavior, I believe Deci and Ryan’s humanistic perspective allows us to better understand the complexity of human behavior.
What happens when our needs are not met?
When our needs are not met and our sense of personal significance is threatened, we compensate through fight or flight responses in an attempt to restore or escape our lost sense of significance.
Fight responses include displays of superiority and displays of power. Displays of superiority include harnessing status symbols or sabotaging others, and displays of power include aggressive attempts to control or manipulate others.
Flight responses include social withdrawal, which could involve escapist behaviors. These behaviors may include the use of drugs, addictive behaviors, or other ineffective coping mechanisms such as projection, denial, or displacement.
Both of these processes fuel addiction and mental health issues, including suicide.
Why is it important to understand the root causes?
When someone is acting out by engaging in destructive behaviors, we need to look beyond the surface. We are often quick to condemn someone’s bad behavior by labeling them a bad person.
The problem with simply labeling someone a bad person because of their bad behavior is that it does not get to the root causes of that behavior.
Looking beyond the surface behavior does not excuse the behavior. It just allows us to see the situation more realistically so that we can better understand what is actually going on so we can more effectively deal with the behavior.
Simply attempting to punish someone’s bad behavior without addressing the unmet needs may stop the behavior in the short term, but will only serve as a temporary solution.
Trying to change someone’s behavior by simply punishing them is comparable to trying to cure an addiction by taking away someone’s drugs and calling them a bad person. Realistically, would this get someone any closer to recovery?
From my experience in the addiction field, if the underlying reasons are not addressed, reprimanding someone with negative statements only drives them away. Their fight or flight response is already over-active, so attacking them only contributes to the problem.
If you can relate to this situation, you may be interested in checking out my article, The Ultimate Guide to Helping Someone Change.
What are some root causes of negative behavior?
As stated before, the root causes of negative behavior consist of reacting to the pain of our unmet needs through fight or flight.
Some responses may include the following examples highlighted in the psychodynamic psychology of defense mechanisms:
- Displacement: acting out on a substitute target. For example, having a bad day at work and taking it out on a partner at home.
- Projection: a way of denying our own faults or insecurities by projecting them onto someone else, and accusing that other person of those things.
- Regression: falling into childish behaviors when under stress.
- Denial: a form of flight from difficult thoughts or emotions and an unwillingness to face the reality of a situation.
People may resort to defense mechanisms instead of effectively coping with difficult situations for many reasons.
A root cause of these behaviors may include an earlier experience of trauma. Traumas may include a sudden disturbing event where an individual losses all sense of control, or a complex trauma whereby the person is traumatized by the long-term cumulative effect of a relationship or situation.
What drives positive behavior?
As stated before, human beings are not simply reacting to rewards and punishments. Our negative behavior is largely influenced by the despair associated with fundamental needs are not being met.
In the same way, our positive behavior can be largely attributed to our needs being met and our attempt to expand the sense of joy we receive from acting in alignment with these needs.
The need for autonomy gives us a sense of control over our lives. Research on children in school indicates that facilitating a child’s sense of autonomy has strong potential for developing their sense of intrinsic motivation in school.
The need for Relatedness gives us the sense that although we are our own individual persons, we are integrated within a larger community. My own research on veterans in transition to civilian life highlights this point. Many of the persons I spoke with stated the bond developed in the military was a high point in their lives.
The need for contribution gives us a sense of being connected to a clause larger than ourselves, in addition to the sense that we are expanding our abilities to make a contribution. Research on indicators of a positive mindset among men found that work satisfaction has the greatest impact.
Job satisfaction is associated with a sense of meaningful contribution. In addition to contribution, positive workplace environments facilitate a sense of trust and relatedness with one’s team, while maintaining a level of individual control of one’s work.
Conclusion
Human behavior is driven by rewards and punishments in addition to the drive to fulfill the need for a sense of significance. This is achieved through a perceived sense of control over one’s life, a sense of social belonging, and a sense of effective social contribution.
If you are interested in getting an even deeper understanding of our drive to seek purpose in life, you can check out my article, What Does It Mean to Have a Purpose?
