How Can We Be Happy?

Student's Name

Institution

Professor

Course

Date
 How Can We Be Happy?

The article chosen is "the optimum level of well-being: Can people be too happy?" The

article by Oishi et al. presents a fascinating insight into the concept of optimal well-being and

examines whether people can be too happy. The study is based on a comprehensive survey of

over 4,000 participants in the United States and Japan, allowing the authors to draw meaningful

conclusions about the differences between the two cultures regarding optimal well-being. The

authors thoroughly analyze what their research means for our knowledge of what makes people

happy and healthy.

However, there are some issues with the article. Firstly, there is a lack of data to back up

the authors' claims. The survey data is used to draw correlations between well-being and

happiness, but the authors do not provide evidence that these correlations are statistically

significant. Secondly, the authors do not discuss any potential limitations of the study or

potential sources of bias. Finally, the authors do not discuss any potential implications of their

findings on public policy or practical applications. Overall, the article by Oishi et al. provides a

comprehensive overview of the concept of optimal well-being and examines whether people can

be too happy. The authors present their findings clearly and concisely, and their discussion of the

implications of the results is detailed and informative. However, the article does not provide any

empirical evidence to support its conclusions or discuss any potential limitations or implications.

The article is well written. The authors present their findings clearly and concisely, and

their discussion of the implications of the results is detailed and informative. The article also

provides a comprehensive overview of the concept of optimal well-being and examines the idea

of whether or not people can be too happy. This article's authors use various strategies to make

the writing effective. Firstly, they use a logical structure to present their findings in a clear and
organized way. The article begins by introducing the concept of optimal well-being and then

proceeds to discuss the results of the survey conducted in the US and Japan. The authors then

provide a comprehensive analysis of what their research means for our knowledge of the factors

that contribute to happiness and well-being. "The results of our study suggest that the optimal

level of well-being is different in the US and Japan and that in both countries, there is an upper

limit to the level of happiness that is beneficial." (Oishi, Shigehiro, et al., p. 351).

The authors also use various rhetorical devices to make their writing more engaging and

effective. For example, the authors use rhetorical questions to draw attention to certain points

and stimulate the reader's interest. The authors also use vivid and colourful language to help

readers visualize the concepts they are discussing. "Our findings suggest that achieving an

optimal level of well-being can be beneficial, but it is possible to have too much of a good

thing." (Oishi, Shigehiro, et al., p. 360). Finally, the authors conclude the article by offering their

findings' potential practical applications and implications. By doing so, the authors provide the

reader with a clear understanding of how their findings can be applied in everyday life and how

the results of their study can be used to inform public policy.

This article's authors use various strategies to make the writing effective. They use a

logical structure to present their findings, provide a range of evidence to support their

conclusions, use rhetorical devices to engage the reader, and offer potential practical applications

and implications. The writers anticipate counterarguments. For example, they say “that there

may be cultural differences in terms of what constitutes optimal well-being and that their

findings may not apply to all cultures.” (Graff, Birkenstein.) Additionally, they also say that

“their study may have potential limitations, such as potential sources of bias.”
 The authors' arguments' strengths are that they present their conclusions in a clear and

organized way and provide a range of evidence to support their findings. They also effectively

anticipate counterarguments by acknowledging the potential limitations of their study and the

potential sources of bias. The weakness of the authors' arguments is that they do not provide any

empirical evidence to support their conclusions, nor do they discuss any potential practical

applications of their findings. The authors do not discuss any potential implications of their

findings on public policy.

The writers effectively summarize other views. Throughout the article, the authors

provide a comprehensive overview of the various theories and research that have been conducted

on the concept of optimal well-being, including the work of other researchers and theorists. The

authors elaborate on the significance of their research and how it relates to that of other

academics. They also discuss the potential limitations of their study and the potential sources of

bias that may have affected the results.

Furthermore, the authors discuss the potential implications of their findings on public

policy and how their work can inform our understanding of the relationship between happiness

and well-being. They also provide potential practical applications of their findings, such as how

the results of their study can be used to inform public policy. Overall, the authors effectively

summarize other views by providing a comprehensive overview of the various theories and

research that have been conducted on the concept of optimal well-being. They also discuss the

implications of their findings, the potential limitations of their study, and the potential

implications and applications of their work.

 Works Cited

Oishi, Shigehiro, et al. "The Optimum Level of Well-Being: Can People Be Too Happy?"

Perspectives on Psychological Science, vol. 2, no. 4, Dec. 2007, pp. 346–360,

10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00048.x.

Graff Gerald & Birkenstein Cathy. “They Say I Say.” The Moves That Matter in Academic

Writing. 3rd edition.