An Interview with Psychologist Milla Titova
Dr. Titova is an assistant teaching professor at the University of Washington, whose research interests focus on happiness and well-being.
Maya Hsu: Hi, I'm Maya Hsu and I'm a research intern here at Seattle Anxiety Specialists, and today I'm joined by Dr. Milla Titova. Dr. Titova is an assistant teaching professor at the University of Washington, whose research interests concentrate on happiness and well-being. She has numerous publications about positive emotions and well-being levels, and is specifically drawn to the effects that cultural and individual personality differences have on people's happiness. She has also given many talks about prosocial behavior, happiness and well-being around the world. Dr. Titova, would you like to introduce yourself and share a little bit about your research?
Milla Titova: Sure. Well, thank you for having me first of all, and you already said my name, so I don't need to repeat that. My research concentrates on happiness and well-being in general, and one of the more specific things about happiness and well-being that I'm interested in is how relationships play a role in that, and in particular prosocial behavior, concentrating on others rather than concentrating on ourselves and how that can be beneficial to our own well-being. And one of the recent projects that I conducted looked at how maybe in situations where we want to improve our happiness and well-being, instead of actually concentrating on ourselves, we can turn that from inside out and concentrate on well-being and happiness of others. So, particularly, trying to make others happier, actually leads to more happiness for ourselves, even though that might sound a little bit contradictory at first and surprising. As always, often, when we are not feeling maybe the best, we are trying to actually keep the focus on ourselves and not necessarily interact with others in those situations.
Maya Hsu: Great. Would you mind defining prosocial behavior and how that term relates to what you're talking about here?
Milla Titova: Sure. So prosocial behavior is what you would think it is. It's just helping others, doing something for others, just being social in a positive way towards someone else. So that's the larger definition of prosocial behavior. In the project that I just mentioned in particular, what me and my co-author were interested in was mostly actually asking people to do something to improve happiness and mood of other people. So that was a more a smaller chunk of prosocial behavior, so to say, that you are looking at.
Maya Hsu: That sounds kind of like altruism, where you're doing something almost charitable. Would you say that that is a subset of prosocial behavior or are they different? Do they overlap?
Milla Titova: Yes, so, altruism is usually something that doesn't necessarily have that selfish part of helping others. So prosocial behavior, I would say is more general. That includes that you might be helping others because you want some benefit for yourself. Altruism is more that maybe it's even hurting you and you are still helping someone else. So usually, the true altruistic behaviors are things like when you risk your life to help somebody else, that's usually what I would give as an example of altruism. Which the things that we were looking in, in this particular research, I wouldn't call them altruistic per se. People weren't really suffering in any way or taking anything from themselves in those prosocial acts that we asked participants to do.
Maya Hsu: Okay. So altruism requires, or it involves an element of sacrifice, and prosocial behavior is more, if you are somewhat aware that you're gaining something back?
Milla Titova: Well, I would say that prosocial behavior includes both altruism and a more selfish things, it's just a more broader term.
Maya Hsu: Okay.
Milla Titova: But altruism is, it's usually this true selfless act of helping someone.
Maya Hsu: And in your paper that you published this year, “Happiness Comes from Trying to Make Others Feel Good Rather than Oneself,” you studied pro-social behavior— just that more broad version, so it encompassed the altruism and the more selfish acts?
Milla Titova: Yes. And in this particular project, we just give specific instructions of what to do or what to recall, because we had different studies. Some of them we actually asked people to do something and in other situations, they were just recalling a recent time when they engaged in a particular activity that we were interested in. For the most part, we asked participants to either do or recall something that makes someone in their life happy or improves their mood. And we were just, like, whatever works. Like, you know you're going to be doing that, you know what they like, what would elevate their mood and improve their happiness. So that's the definition of that prosocial behavior that we were talking about in this particular project.
In one of the studies, we also, that was a little bit different from the others, where we had a very specific thing that we asked participants to do, and that had to do with feeding expired parking meters for other people. So that was something, I wouldn't call it an altruistic behavior because again, there's not necessarily that much of a sacrifice that the person was doing. But we provided a couple quarters for our participants, and we asked them to feed the meters that have expired, to make that person happy in that particular way. So that was one of the other definitions of prosocial behavior that popped up in this project.
Maya Hsu: For the people whose meters that expired that got re-pumped by the participants in your study, if they didn't know that it was re-pumped by somebody generously, so it didn't necessarily make them happy because they didn't know it was happening, were the participants, did their mood still elevate after donating that money, even though they didn't necessarily get feedback that they succeeded in making someone else happy?
Milla Titova: That's a great question. That's one of the reasons why we did do that last, which was the last study in our package of studies. Because we were interested in, well, does this effect that we find that improving somebody's else's happiness is so good for our happiness, does that happen because people in our early studies were usually picking their roommate, their mom, their sibling, their significant other? So it was always, well, I'm doing something for this person who I'm interacting with and I really know very well. We were like, okay, what about those situations who have strangers, with those parking meters, and the situations where there might be not an interaction actually present? The person might not even ever find out that you did that for them.
So that's why we wanted to do this a little bit different study and what we found, so we actually had multiple different conditions for that parking meter study. We had two variations for the condition where participants were feeding somebody else's meter, and in one condition, they just fed the meter, that's it, they responded to our survey and then they went on their merry way. And then in the other condition, we actually provided them with these little index cards and we asked them to write something to the person that they did that for. So something like, “Hey, I fed your meter. Enjoy your day,” whatever. It was whatever they wanted to write. We found that the happiness levels of people who left the note were a little bit higher than those who didn't leave the note.
We don't really know what exact explanation for that was. And there are multiple hypotheses that I have that can explain why we found that difference. One of them is more selfish. It's more like, “Okay, I let the person know that I did it for them, so they’re going to know that I'm such a good person and I did something for them.” So that's one explanation why that could improve that happiness boosting effect. But the other explanation is that it could be that by asking participants to write that note, we actually provided them with an additional nice activity to do. First, they feed somebody's else's meter, and then they also write a nice note to them. So in that way, it's like they're doubling up on those prosocial activities, so maybe that's why their happiness levels are higher in the note condition rather than the no-note condition. So not sure which one it is, we don't have the data to show which one of the two. I hope it's the second one just because it's a nicer explanation, more positive, but I can't say which one it really is.
Maya Hsu: It would be interesting to see the data on that, on whether it's the first or the second one. If it was the second one, then it would, I'm guessing, promote almost excessive niceness or excessive kindness in people, because then they would not only want to do one charitable act, but two or three at a time to reap the most benefits.
Milla Titova: Which also reminds me, there is some research on random acts of kindness that has been done with college students. And in that particular study, researchers found that just doing one small act of kindness per day for a week, didn't actually show huge effects for happiness boosts. But doing multiple, kind of a lot more, did. And the explanation for that, that researchers in that particular study showed, which was, I think was done by Sonja Lyubomirsky and colleagues, and it's just that college students are, they usually do random acts of kindness. That wasn't a big intervention on the researchers’ part when they only asked for one small thing. But if you ask for a lot more, then you really feel the difference. So maybe that's also why that worked in our study, that the more things you pile up, the more boosts you might have. I'm sure there is some limit where it all becomes a burden of some sort, but at least with, for us, the two things versus one thing worked better in this particular study.
Maya Hsu: Do you know if there's any data on if there are more mood-boosting effects for altruistic behaviors or behaviors that require a sacrifice, require a little bit of suffering on the part of the giver?
Milla Titova: That is a great question. I don't know, actually. I know that prosocial behavior of any kind usually has mood boosting happiness, boosting effects. Which also leaves researchers open to there is always different camps of people saying that there is no true altruism. Because as we know, prosocial behavior always has this positive effect, so are you really selfishly doing it when you know you're going to have that positive boost in that way? And even with the extreme altruistic behaviors, when somebody is literally risking their life or even maybe losing their life, that even then there are some people who are like, well, but then if you literally die saving somebody, could you get the fame that comes with it? Yes, you're dead, but everyone's going to remember you.
So there's often, it's a big debate. So there are some people who say, yes, altruistic behavior can be truly altruistic and really just want to help somebody without any selfish benefits. But there are other people who say, no, there's just always benefits of some kind that you will have. Or another explanation with that is that it's not necessarily maybe the benefit, but if someone is really needing help and you are going to risk your life and potentially lose your life to help them, if you don't do it, you're going to be feeling guilty for the rest of your life. So again, it's selfish to help because you're avoiding that feeling of guilt that you never helped that person. Even if you might end up dying doing this, which is again, very extreme examples here, but lots of debate. People fall on the different spectrum of that. I personally would like to believe that people can be truly altruistic, but I can see both sides of the debate having some legitimate points there.
Maya Hsu: It sounds like it's a little bit difficult to draw a conclusion that altruism versus more selfless or more selfish prosocial behavior, that one will lead to more happiness or mood boosting effects because that concept of altruism is so heavily debated and subjective at this point.
Milla Titova: Yeah. I would say so because it's hard to draw the line and again, some people would just say that altruism doesn't even exist.
Maya Hsu: I see. Okay. What are some everyday examples of other focused acts of kindness?
Milla Titova: So in our study, we mostly had college students. We obviously read things that we asked them what they did and read what they said. And a lot of the things were fairly simple and easy to do. Some students called their mom because they knew they were going to make their mom happy. Other people would take their roommate out for dinner or buy them coffee, things of that nature, or just doing some favorite activity that you know that person likes, like watching their favorite movie, listening to their favorite song. It's oftentimes really very small things, but it worked. It was beneficial for at least our participants. I don't know if it actually made whoever they were trying to make happy, happy, but our participants thought that they did well and it improved their happiness.
Maya Hsu: So listeners wanting to incorporate more acts of other focused kindness into their days, it sounds like just putting others first in smaller, very casual scenarios would work.
Milla Titova: Yeah. It's often very small things. And then you're just thinking, what do people in your life like? If you know that maybe surprising them with a cup of coffee that you got from their favorite coffee shop just out of the blue, it's so small, but as a recipient of something like that you're like, oh my God, this is awesome, and then you're doing it to somebody. So it really doesn't take that much necessarily to improve somebody's happiness and elevate somebody's mood. It's just that conscious decision to do that and actually follow through with that, that’s all it takes. But sometimes we're just so wrapped up in our own head that we are not necessarily thinking about doing those things.
Maya Hsu: How long roughly can that last, that shift in mood when you sacrifice or when you do something prosocial? Is it minutes, hours, days? How long does that effect last?
Milla Titova: That's a great question. So in our particular study, we only looked at later that day, and that's where it ended for us, or even immediately after activity, or we also did a recalling paradigm when you were just like, remember the last time you met somebody happy, how did you feel? But I know from other studies that do look at prosocial behavior or random acts of kindness that are more longitudinal in nature, they usually show that the effects can linger for a while as well. But with the nature of psychological research, it may be a month later, a couple of months later, usually people don't check further than that for those interventions where people are asked to participate in random acts of kindness or something like that.
But generally, if we know that it works, if you did it earlier that day in our study, and then you are happier in the evening of that day, if you keep doing it, it should work. If you do it today, do it tomorrow, do it the day after and so on, so it should prolong this effect. With that being said, there is also something to be worried about, which we often refer to as hedonic adaptation, or it's sometimes referred to as hedonic treadmill, which is something how people psychologically are built, that we tend to get used to good things. So with that bearing those things would be, so if someone wants to do this as a long time intervention, you got to be aware that you need to vary it so you don't just get used to it.
So let's say, you're like, okay, “I really love my roommate. I'm going to surprise them with their coffee every day.” By the end of whatever, week one, the roommate is over it, you're over it, it's too much of the same thing. But varying it, like today, I'm going to surprise my roommate, tomorrow I'm going to surprise my coworker, the day after I'm going to do something for my mom, whatever. So it's just making sure that you're not getting into this routine where something that is exciting and you do get that boost from, doesn't become something that you are really used to. So you enter that hedonic treadmill where it's not going up anymore, it's just the same place.
Maya Hsu: That makes sense. Did you notice in your studies anything about just overall a decrease in time of how much happiness was gained from each prosocial behavior just as the novelty of it wore off?
Milla Titova: So in our studies, we only asked, one participant did something one time. So we didn't have that data in terms of that. But again, from other broader research body from other people and stuff that do longitudinal stuff, I know that that tends to happen, that hedonic adaptation. I'm not sure what the sweet spot for it is in terms of how long do you do something until you are tired of it necessarily, or at least until you know the effect wears off. So I'm not sure about that, but this is just something to keep in mind in general. And I would bet it's different for different people. So for some people, maybe doing the same thing for a while might actually work longer than for some other people. So there's big individual differences when it comes to pretty much everything, but especially those things. You got to find what works for you, what fits your style, that kind of stuff.
Maya Hsu: You used the word intervention earlier about implementing this into your life. And I could see applicability for everybody, but do you think there are certain people or certain mental illnesses or challenges that this type of intervention would be particularly beneficial for?
Milla Titova: That's a great question. I have personally never worked in clinical populations. So all the participants in any of the studies that I have conducted, they're always just college students, people on the street, people I found online. So it's usually not people who are particularly diagnosed with any conditions or anything like that. However, you also know how prevalent those things are in populations, so I'm sure I've gotten some in those samples, even though I wasn't looking specifically. But again, from a broader literature that I know, I know that those small activities, we often refer to them as positive psychological intervention in positive psychology in general, which challenges you to do small activities designed to promote happiness. It’s a simple definition of positive psychological interventions. They have been applied on various populations, including people who are depressed and have various concerns that they might have about their mental health, and it seemed to be working for various populations pretty well.
I wouldn't say that if you have a serious problem with depression or anxiety at the clinical level, doing something like that is just going to fix it. But in addition to seeing a therapist, doing other things, that can be helpful, especially I think for people who, oftentimes, when we do have mental health struggles, we become so self-centered. We are just really thinking about ourselves and everything that's happening with us. And we often think that, well, we are in too bad of a spot to be really interacting with other people. Well, we know how important other people are for us, we're social creatures. So reaching out to others, doing something nice for others, is almost always a good idea.
Again, maybe if a person has social anxiety, maybe not. I'm not talking about when it becomes a much larger issue, but for most people even in situations of mental struggles, it's just we’re naturally just like okay, “I need to fix myself first and then start reaching out to others and think about my social connections and stuff,” but others can help you fix whatever you're trying to fix. So it is, I would think, that it could be applied in many, many different situations for many people who are having issues with very different things.
Maya Hsu: So would you say, aside from social anxiety in general, people, it often would be wise to do a counterintuitive measure where if you have the tendency or the inclination to isolate yourself, hide from the world and focus inward, that you should do the opposite and go and be with people and do something kind for others?
Milla Titova: Yeah. I would say so. And I also, with all of that being said, any psychological study we are talking about this works on average, and any psychological finding that you ever encounter, my advice for everybody is, okay, this works for a lot of people. You can try it and see if it works for you. You know what I mean? So the findings that whatever research that you read or hear about, it suggests to you that it works for a good chunk of people, that there is a significant effect, but then there is also a lot of individual differences and individual things that might not quite, you know… Because there's outliers in every study and that outlier could be you or anyone else.
So my advice is always, okay, we find this effect, go try it out and see if you will feel, maybe you'll be like, “oh, wow. Why did I not consider that before?” Or maybe you're going to be like, “yeah, no, I don't know. That's not for me.” So with literally any finding, it works that way. But on the other hand, knowing that research suggests that for a bunch of people that was beneficial and that worked, is usually a pretty good sign that it might work for you as well.
Maya Hsu: Thank you for that.
Milla Titova: Sure.
Maya Hsu: Is either other-focused happiness or self-focused happiness instinctual, or are they both learned?
Milla Titova: That is a good question. I am not sure if I have the answer to this question based on the data that we have and the studies that we particularly had. I know just more anecdotally, that oftentimes people are like, oh wow. Making others happy makes us happy, which made me think that people don't necessarily assume, or think that that's the best way. And I think again, people just tend to be more self-focused naturally, but again, I didn't necessarily ask people, what do you think is going to be better, this or that? So that would've been fun question to ask actually. Let me think about that.
Maya Hsu: Are there situations where it makes more sense to be focused on achieving happiness for yourself over others, just in terms of comparing the amount of benefit?
Milla Titova: Well, given that if you concentrate more and yourself, at least in our data, it shows that it's going to give you less of a benefit in the happiness. So in given that, I would say, no, you should just go for others, and then you will end up improving yourself more. So in that way, I would suggest at least, again, trying that out and see what happens. I think that again, I'm going to just sound like a broken record, but people often think that it's just, you need to fix yourself first. You need to think about yourself first. So just breaking out from this way of thinking would, I think, be helpful and potentially, that may be why the benefit is there.
I mean, in our studies, we do find that the main mechanism for this is relatedness-need satisfaction, which we want to be connected with other people, we want to have good connections, and people were getting this relatedness-need satisfaction, even in those studies where they didn't interact with a person. It still gave them this sense of being related to somebody else, even though they didn't talk to them, they didn't see them, they don't know how they look like, they know nothing about them, but just doing something for someone else feeds that relatedness.
Maya Hsu: This conversation makes me think of self-care and how we're in an era of, I think, changing how we view self-care, because previously, I think we conceptualized that with pampering oneself and buying products to make oneself feel better. And now, I think we're shifting a little bit toward being more self-kind and self-compassionate. And so this just has me wondering how to balance the amount of self-care and self-kindness, when one isn't feeling the best, because the data, it suggests that most, if not, all of the focus and energy should be spent toward making other people feel happy and appreciated, because then you will indirectly feel that reward as well. How would you recommend balancing those two, because there must be some degree of self-care that's important?
Milla Titova: Yeah. Of course. I'm not saying that people should always and forever just forget about yourself, do everything for others. No. Totally not. Self-care is super important and I think that you made a great point in terms of how self-care is not always taking a bubble bath or splurging on a purse, as we used to more think about it. It's more psychological self-care. It's really taking time off, not beating yourself up that you are, oh my God, you're not working on a Sunday. You're not being productive. That's fine. That's how it should be. So I think that a lot of self-care has to do with that, just accepting yourself, being kind to yourself. Self-compassion is a big, big thing.
Thinking of self-compassion, there are different components of self-compassion and some of them have to do with mindfulness, just being present in the moment, just enjoying the moment, not being judgmental towards your thoughts, acknowledging them, letting them go, which is not easy. It takes a lot to actually be good at being mindful. But I think it's important in any condition, when you think about, if you are doing something for yourself and you are in the moment of just self-compassion, self-care or whatever, or if you are in situations where you interact with others, being mindful is pretty important. You are present in the moment, you are not thinking about 100 things that you need to get done or whatever things that you or what it might be, you're just really present for this other person, which again, will improve your relationships and stuff.
But in terms of the specific prescribed balance, I don't think I have the specific number or any prescribed thing. And again, I also think it will depend on a person. Some people really need to be alone to recharge or to feel themselves. Other people need less of that, so you got to find what works for you.
Maya Hsu: Awesome. Well, it was wonderful speaking with you. Is there anything else you'd like to share with the world about happiness or well-being or altruism?
Milla Titova: What else do I want to share? Great question. I don't know. Just with the, especially now, the times are weird in the pandemic, it's really easy to concentrate on all the negative things. So I think that just taking a moment to be grateful for some good things that you have. We all have at least something good going on, small or big. Just thinking about it, switching perspective, thinking about the things that we can be grateful for versus the things that we are missing, not doing or want to have, really can give us some moments of peace and happiness and contentment. Just being nice and calm and enjoying the moment for at least every once in a while, because I think it's very easy to get carried away by all the worries that we have nowadays. So that would be my last thought or advice.
Maya Hsu: Thank you so much, Dr. Titova. It was wonderful having you on our series today.
Milla Titova: Thank you so much for having me.
Please note: The views expressed by the interviewee are for educational and informational purposes only, are not meant to diagnose or treat any condition, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Seattle Anxiety Specialists, PLLC.
Editor: Jennifer (Ghahari) Smith, Ph.D.