Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Exploring the potential solutions to the criticisms of positive psychology: But can the bold, idealistic visions of positive psychologists survive real-world scrutiny?

  • Llewellyn Ellardus van Zyl*
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

125 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Positive psychology has faced growing criticism regarding its scientific foundations and applied impact. To encourage constructive dialog, this study employs a Participatory Action Research (PAR) approach to co-create potential ways to address the critiques of positive psychology. By engaging positive psychological practitioners and scholars, we investigate their perspectives on addressing the discipline’s theoretical, methodological, and practical challenges and critically evaluate the viability of these solutions. Purposive sampling gathered data from 213 positive psychology researchers and practitioners. Participants were familiarized with the main criticisms through a participatory online workshop and then engaged in small group discussions to generate potential solutions to such. Content analysis identified 16 themes and 37 categories of proposed solutions. While the proposed solutions showed promise, some appear idealistic given academic realities. This participatory study empowers positive psychologists to actively shape the evolution of their field through ongoing dialog, reflective co-creation and knowledge generation.

Original languageEnglish
Article number1511128
JournalFrontiers in psychology
Volume16
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 24 Apr 2025

Keywords

  • criticisms of positive psychology
  • critiques of positive psychology
  • participatory action research
  • solutions
  • third wave positive psychology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Exploring the potential solutions to the criticisms of positive psychology: But can the bold, idealistic visions of positive psychologists survive real-world scrutiny?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this