Background and objectives: Positive affect treatments, which hold great promise to connect with those who are otherwise resistant to depression treatments, attempt to upregulate positive emotions. These treatments have potential advantages over standard therapies because they target cross-diagnostic core symptoms (e.g., anhedonia) that may respond better to interventions aimed at increased positivity. However, the extent to which these treatments are a perceived fit by individuals for whom they were developed (i.e., individuals who are afraid of, avoid, or experience less positivity) is unclear.
Methods: We conducted two independent studies utilizing a cross-sectional, experimental design to examine perceived treatment fit. Participants (Study 1: N = 416; Study 2: N = 321) read counterbalanced treatment descriptions of (1) positive affect treatment and (2) psychodynamic psychotherapy and answered questions regarding perceived treatment fit, effectiveness, and preference of the two treatments.
Results: Our findings suggest that individuals fearful of happiness perceived a prospective depression treatment specifically targeting positivity as a poorer fit, demonstrating an opposite pattern to the overall samples' treatment preference in both studies. Thus, as predicted by Reward Devaluation Theory, those fearing positivity exhibited avoidance behaviors for treatments that are to an extent designed, and might otherwise be most effective, for them.
Limitations: The current study utilized a college student sample.
Conclusion: These empirical findings may ultimately inform psychoeducation of why positive affect treatments, which are in direct contrast with clients' preferences, may be the very treatments they need the most.
Keywords: Happiness; Positive affect treatment; Reward devaluation theory.
Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.