James Fowler at the Framingham Center for Integrative Psychological Research at the University of California, San Diego, and Nicholas Christakis at Harvard Medical School studied the relationship between the well-being of 4739 study subjects and their social interactions from 1983 to 2003.
After sorting out the relationship between each study subject, the researchers scrutinized the subjects’ answers to a set of four questions used to test the depression index.
They found a variety of happiness types in the friend group, spouse group, family member group, and neighborhood group.
Not surprisingly, individuals’ happiness is influenced by the people they interact with. The study, which was published in the British Medical Journal, also found that subjects were influenced by people’s happiness, even if those people were three tiers apart from them.
The study showed that if you have a happy friend, you are 15% more likely to be happy.
Even if your friend’s friend’s friend is happy, you’re 6% more likely to be happy.
In other words, your friend’s friend – even if you don’t know him – exerts a great deal of influence on your mindset in life.
“We’ve long known that people’s social interactions are the best indicator of their well-being. But this study shows that it matters, much more than many people think.” So says Dr. Daniel Gilbert, professor of psychology at Harvard University.
The role of distance
Physical proximity is the most direct indicator of the diffusion of happiness at social events.
Buddies who live within 1 mile of the test subject have a 25% greater influence on their well-being, and buddies who live 1 mile away have a less significant influence on their well-being.
So, our friends on our phones and Facebook have much less influence on our mood than a close neighbor who we can wave to when we take out the trash.
“This means that the circle of life is actually more territorial than many people think.” “Modern technology allows people to build a wide social circle, but it’s the local one that really works,” says John F. Helliwell of the Canadian Institute for Advanced Study.