Symposium Summary:

This symposium explores both the history and future of positive psychology with a view to focusing on the central question “how can positive psychology be better?”. Lomas and colleagues have described the purpose of applied positive psychology as to “make life better” (Lomas, Hefferon, & Ivtzan, 2014, p. vii) and now we turn our attention beyond the individual to consideration of the field as a holistic entity. Four exciting and hugely experienced presenters will discuss, debate, and argue for how positive psychology can be better by focusing on four key questions:
1. What has worked well so far for positive psychology since it was formally launched? Such a focus provides key insights into strengths, asserts, and strategies, which can be further leveraged in making positive psychology better in the future. [[Speaker 1]]
2. What has not worked well so far for positive psychology since it was formally launched? What are both the formally documented and undocumented criticisms of positive psychology, and which are most critical to its better future? [[Speaker 2]]
3. What does a “better positive psychology” look like? For example, what would positive psychology look like if it was more integrated, encapsulating a great multi-disciplinary and inter-disciplinary approach? [[Speaker 3]]
4. How, exactly, can positive psychology be better? With a clearer vision of what “better” might look like for a wider selection of stakeholders of the field of positive psychology, what are some actions that various stakeholders (academics, practitioners, leadership) could take to enable such a positive change? [[Speaker 4]]
Each speaker will be encouraged by the moderator, Prof Oades, to draw on relevant literature related to their key question, as well as direct experience in their various activities in the field since its inception – which includes holding senior leadership positions, founding journals and associations, and providing though leadership in scholarship and elsewhere.