11 ms·

The impact of gratitude on adolescent materialism and generosity

107 points by joeyespo 8y ago

avmich 8y ago
> According to research, materialism has been linked to a variety of mental health problems, such as anxiety and depression, as well as selfish attitudes and behaviors. It would be interesting to many here, I suppose, to find details of such research. Also comparisons of problems caused my materialistic world view versus idealistic world view could be interesting. However we may easily trip into religious disagreements here, which are both burdensome and seem to be quite outside of the YC area. May be we best leave this topic undiscussed here?
- aklemm 8y ago
  It had remained undiscussed until you and I showed up.
- raybb 8y ago
  From the study mentioned in the link: > Indeed, materialism among this population has been linked to a variety of mental health problems such as anxiety and depression (Froh, Emmons, Card, Bono, & Wilson, 2011a), the use of addictive substances such as alcohol and illegal drugs (Williams, Cox, Hedberg, & Deci, 2000), and selfish attitudes and behaviors (Kasser, 2005). Froh, J. J., Emmons, R., Card, N., Bono, G., & Wilson, J. (2011a). Gratitude and the reduced costs of materialism in adolescents. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12(2), 289–302. Williams, G. C., Cox, E. M., Hedberg, V. A., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Extrinsic life goals and health-risk behaviors in adolescents. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(8), 1756–1771. Kasser, T. (2005). Frugality, generosity, and materialism in children and adolescents. In K. A. Moore, L. H. Lippman, K. A. Moore, & L. H. Lippman (Eds.), What do children need to flourish: Conceptualizing and measuring indicators of positive development (pp. 357–373). New York, NY, US: Springer Science + Business Media
- tetromino_ 8y ago
  > comparisons of problems caused my materialistic world view versus idealistic world view could be interesting Materialism ties your happiness to the state of a vast and unfriendly external system that you, particularly if you are a child in a non-wealthy family, cannot control. Suppose one day materialistic instincts - manipulated by advertisers and wealthy, high-status peers - inform you that you ought to acquire an expensive Thing to maintain your status and sense of self-worth. Your parents are unwilling or unable to provide the Thing for you. You, as a young person, cannot earn or save enough to buy the Thing on your own. As a result, you become unhappy. The situation repeats frequently, as materialistic instincts then go on to tell you that you ought to acquire Thing_2, Thing_3, etc.
  - logicchains 8y ago
    >Suppose one day materialistic instincts - manipulated by advertisers and wealthy, high-status peers - inform you that you ought to acquire an expensive Thing to maintain your status and sense of self-worth. Your parents are unwilling or unable to provide the Thing for you. You, as a young person, cannot earn or save enough to buy the Thing on your own. As a result, you become unhappy. Wouldn't this depend on the personality of the child? Maybe the child decides "I'm going to work hard, study hard and hussle until I have these things, and have more of them than my wealthy peers". I've spent a lot of time in China, where the majority of people grew up way poorer than even the poorest Americans (albeit with better access to schooling) and such an attitude is not uncommon.
  - Swizec 8y ago
    I don’t know about that but my parents always said: Money doesn’t bring happiness, but being unhappy in a Porsche sure as hell beats having your old clunker break down on the way to pick up your kids from kindergarten. Money solves problems. Fewer priblems makes you happier.
    - smileysteve 8y ago
      > Porsche > Fewer problems makes you happier. Ironically the "old clunker" is likely to generate fewer problems that cost less. I recently had someone complain to me about getting their newer BMW serviced at service centers; I told them you could always buy a 10 year old car that you could take anywhere; like me.
      - Swizec 8y ago
        The problem is when your choices are “Do I fix my car or buy groceries this week”
    - esotericn 8y ago
      A desire for wealth is distinct from materialism. The main benefit of having enough money is to have security in one's self - stable living situation, health taken care of, and so on and so forth.
xor_ax_ax 8y ago
My 2 centidollars: Consistent boundaries and "no" to almost everything. Dumpster diving, second hand stores and DIY maker craft_ship. Resourcefulness over new and shiny. Occasional extravagances where it makes sense.
aklemm 8y ago
My friend and I discussed this today and are still left without a lot of good ideas for our kids (who are mostly normal), but show shocking levels (to us) of materialism and lack of gratitude. What’s developmentally appropriate? When is a kid ready to focus away from shiny stuff onto what matters for a good life?
- whitepoplar 8y ago
  How old are your kids? Any specifics you can give?
  - aklemm 8y ago
    8 and 5
    - klodolph 8y ago
      I used to work in informal education with children ages 5-18. I never studied child development but the 5-7 year old kids had to be given a structure just to do basic things like sharing. These kids will straight up lie about things, too. The 5-7 year groups needed staffing levels somewhere around 3:1. It wasn’t until the middle school groups (age 12-14) that you really saw kids with what looked like genuine concern for others, and we ran staffing levels more like 6:1.
      - woogiewonka 8y ago
        I am not an expert on this subject matter but I suspect much of the required structure for younger kids is only a necessity due to constant restrictions and monitoring that's been put in place by modern society. In other words, we are not giving enough space to develop on their own terms and explore their surroundings. I grew up in the 80s and 90s and remember spending a lot of time unsupervised going about wherever and doing all sorts of wild things well before I was 7 years old. Looking back now as a parent it is absolutely terrifying to me what I was "allowed" to do. Then again when I think about the Norma in countries like Japan (where it is not uncommon to see kindergarten kids walking home by themselves and crossing streets and intersections), I am reminded that kids can develop independently to a great tune than we give them credit for. I don't know about Japanese kids materials levels but I've noticed that they are typically given more freedoms to act independently and spend a lot more time on outdoor and social activities. If I had to guess I'd say they are a lot less materialistic than their Western counterparts. As for my own child, I try to let him be independent even at 1 year. For example, we have a TV stand that any parent would be terrified if their kid climbed on it. I was terrified at first but then with some observation and secret supervision I let him climb it. To my surprise he quickly learned how to turn around and get down safely. There was only a single time when he fell from it sideways unhurt, but now he goes up and down like a pro without any supervision. I can leave the room knowing he will always get down fine. To what effect independence will have an impact on materialism remains to be seen but I suspect one of the commenters is right on the money with mirroring behavior and values.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
roenxi 8y ago
By the metrics, the most generous person in the world is Bill Gates who has given away something approaching 30 billion dollars. Maybe there is an argument that he isn't materialistic, but I think the evidence is against that. I suspect they are misusing "materialist" in this context and they meant "selfish". The link is selfishness causes materialism, not materialism causes selfishness.
- Godel_unicode 8y ago
  I think it's very possible that he was materialistic earlier in life, and now that he's got some experience winning at money he's not and is on to generosity.
- rdlecler1 8y ago
  There is absolute and relative generosity. On absolute terms Bill is the most generous. On relative terms even after giving away $30b he still has more money than he could ever spend so there is really no personal sacrifice made.
  - x220 8y ago
    Actually, on relative terms I think he has given away roughly half the money he has ever earned, which makes him exceptionally generous relatively speaking.
    - nielsbot 8y ago
      "earned" seems a bit loaded for this discussion--a lot of this is paper money, no? But 50% of wealth ever possessed, sure.
      - x220 8y ago
        He absolutely earned all of it.
    - ben_w 8y ago
      I stopped calling myself Christian as a result of reading the Bible, but it does have some interesting takes on this topic: “””Amen, I say to you, this poor widow put in more than all the other contributors to the treasury. For they have all contributed from their surplus wealth, but she, from her poverty, has contributed all she had, her whole livelihood.””” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesson_of_the_widow%27s_mite https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesson_of_the_widow%27s_mite
anonu 8y ago
tldr: get your kid to express some gratitude. Eg: reflect around the dinner table and be thankful for the food.
- lihaciudaniel 8y ago
  I will agree so, since I discovered this and how this and positivity affect my perception I practice it daily like a meditative practice . basically it prolongs your instant gratification.
analyst74 8y ago
What I realized as I get older and have met many different people, is that, everyone, is, judgmental. Of course, different people value different things. Some judge by wealth, some by looks, some by height, skin color, hobby, manner, education, intellect, family background, job, way you speak, way you act, etc, etc. Why are some judgmental criterias more acceptable than others? I mean, compared to many of the less change-able traits like look, skin color, where you are from, intelligence, etc, isn't wealth, being acquire-able, a somewhat more "fair" criteria to be judged on?
- philipov 8y ago
  No, because wealth is not fairly distributed. The biggest predictor of wealth is being born rich. Looking at only the best case is not sufficient to call a criterion "fair."
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - Godel_unicode 8y ago
    The operative word being "more". If you agree with gp that people are going to be judgy, which I do, then what we're looking for is least-bad.
    - learc83 8y ago
      >then what we're looking for is least-bad. Wealth certainly isn't the least-bad. Also I haven't seen any evidence that encouraging people to judge others by one metric discourages them from judging people by other metrics.
      - simonh 8y ago
        This is an important point. The implicit assumption of the OP, “if we’re going to judge in one thing” is bogus. Why do we have to judge on only one thing? Why can’t we judge different traits and characteristics based on different metrics? What does material wealth tell us about someone? What is it about them we are judging?
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
edoo 8y ago
Very interesting. It is worth noting that Marxism is rooted in being entitled instead of having gratitude.
- x220 8y ago
  I think that's a massive oversimplification. You could definitely say that people starving feel entitled to food, and feel justified in stealing it. You could also say that an ideology that can be used to explain every power struggle and social ill is very attractive to those who are too smart for their own good.
  - edoo 8y ago
    Most Marxist revolutions involved attacking the producers which did lead to starvation. Just because there are people in the world doing better than you does not automatically mean you are being oppressed. The idea you are entitled to what other people have is absolutely the root of Marxism.
    - tomhoward 8y ago
      I don't think entitlement is as tightly coupled with a single economic philosophy as you'd like to think. Yes there is entitlement evident in the example you're citing, but there's plenty of entitlement evident in other scenarios – e.g., colonialism, feudalism, the behaviour of banking executives in the 2008 financial crisis. It'd be neat if we could simply assign a single political/economic philosophy as being the one that's characterised by entitlement, but like most things in life, the reality is rather more complex.
    - x220 8y ago
      >Most Marxist revolutions involved attacking the producers which did lead to starvation. Yes. > Just because there are people in the world doing better than you does not automatically mean you are being oppressed. Certainly. >The idea you are entitled to what other people have is absolutely the root of Marxism. Here is where I disagree. I think Marxism is fundamentally the idea that all significant suffering in the world is caused by wealthy elites exploiting common people, and that sufficiently eliminating this exploitation will lead to a utopia. It's more than a simple "Give me that!" urge. How else could it be so superficially appealing to naive college students for centuries of history? Don't take this as justification for Marxism. It's not. Marxism is one level above Nazism in a level of evil (if it's not evil, what else could you call evil?) since Nazism eventually demonizes everyone who looks or acts differently than you, but Marxism eventually demonizes (and kills) everyone.
tropo 8y ago
They didn't measure materialism, and very poorly measured generosity. They had some of the participants journal what they were grateful for, they paid all the participants, and they suggested that participants make a supposedly anonymous donation of cash to an unknown cause. Keeping the money is supposedly materialism. No, it is not. Spending the money on frivolous status symbols might be materialism, but that wasn't measured. Keeping the money long-term, or spending it on something of importance, is financially responsible. Giving the money to an unknown cause (might even be an offensive cause) is foolhardy.
exo762 8y ago
Now, what that tells us about action in opposite direction? How to spoil the kid? Tell it that he should feel no gratitude because wealth distribution is random and that hard work, merit, or discipline matter.
woogiewonka 8y ago
I grew up poor and never had a strong desire for material things. I don't know if growing up poor is the reason for this, but I do know that not having access to "fancy" things a kid might have access to, made me spend a lot more time playing outside and keeping occupied with activities. Of course this was all before I had access to a computer. The moment I discovered Age of Empires, I had a strong urge to have my own computer.

107 points by joeyespo 8y ago

> According to research, materialism has been linked to a variety of mental health problems, such as anxiety and depression, as well as selfish attitudes and behaviors. It would be interesting to many here, I suppose, to find details of such research. Also comparisons of problems caused my materialistic world view versus idealistic world view could be interesting. However we may easily trip into religious disagreements here, which are both burdensome and seem to be quite outside of the YC area. May be we best leave this topic undiscussed here?

aklemm 8y ago
It had remained undiscussed until you and I showed up.
raybb 8y ago
From the study mentioned in the link: > Indeed, materialism among this population has been linked to a variety of mental health problems such as anxiety and depression (Froh, Emmons, Card, Bono, & Wilson, 2011a), the use of addictive substances such as alcohol and illegal drugs (Williams, Cox, Hedberg, & Deci, 2000), and selfish attitudes and behaviors (Kasser, 2005). Froh, J. J., Emmons, R., Card, N., Bono, G., & Wilson, J. (2011a). Gratitude and the reduced costs of materialism in adolescents. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12(2), 289–302. Williams, G. C., Cox, E. M., Hedberg, V. A., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Extrinsic life goals and health-risk behaviors in adolescents. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(8), 1756–1771. Kasser, T. (2005). Frugality, generosity, and materialism in children and adolescents. In K. A. Moore, L. H. Lippman, K. A. Moore, & L. H. Lippman (Eds.), What do children need to flourish: Conceptualizing and measuring indicators of positive development (pp. 357–373). New York, NY, US: Springer Science + Business Media
tetromino_ 8y ago
> comparisons of problems caused my materialistic world view versus idealistic world view could be interesting Materialism ties your happiness to the state of a vast and unfriendly external system that you, particularly if you are a child in a non-wealthy family, cannot control. Suppose one day materialistic instincts - manipulated by advertisers and wealthy, high-status peers - inform you that you ought to acquire an expensive Thing to maintain your status and sense of self-worth. Your parents are unwilling or unable to provide the Thing for you. You, as a young person, cannot earn or save enough to buy the Thing on your own. As a result, you become unhappy. The situation repeats frequently, as materialistic instincts then go on to tell you that you ought to acquire Thing_2, Thing_3, etc.
- logicchains 8y ago
  >Suppose one day materialistic instincts - manipulated by advertisers and wealthy, high-status peers - inform you that you ought to acquire an expensive Thing to maintain your status and sense of self-worth. Your parents are unwilling or unable to provide the Thing for you. You, as a young person, cannot earn or save enough to buy the Thing on your own. As a result, you become unhappy. Wouldn't this depend on the personality of the child? Maybe the child decides "I'm going to work hard, study hard and hussle until I have these things, and have more of them than my wealthy peers". I've spent a lot of time in China, where the majority of people grew up way poorer than even the poorest Americans (albeit with better access to schooling) and such an attitude is not uncommon.
- Swizec 8y ago
  I don’t know about that but my parents always said: Money doesn’t bring happiness, but being unhappy in a Porsche sure as hell beats having your old clunker break down on the way to pick up your kids from kindergarten. Money solves problems. Fewer priblems makes you happier.
  - smileysteve 8y ago
    > Porsche > Fewer problems makes you happier. Ironically the "old clunker" is likely to generate fewer problems that cost less. I recently had someone complain to me about getting their newer BMW serviced at service centers; I told them you could always buy a 10 year old car that you could take anywhere; like me.
    - Swizec 8y ago
      The problem is when your choices are “Do I fix my car or buy groceries this week”
  - esotericn 8y ago
    A desire for wealth is distinct from materialism. The main benefit of having enough money is to have security in one's self - stable living situation, health taken care of, and so on and so forth.

xor_ax_ax 8y ago

My 2 centidollars: Consistent boundaries and "no" to almost everything. Dumpster diving, second hand stores and DIY maker craft_ship. Resourcefulness over new and shiny. Occasional extravagances where it makes sense.

aklemm 8y ago

My friend and I discussed this today and are still left without a lot of good ideas for our kids (who are mostly normal), but show shocking levels (to us) of materialism and lack of gratitude. What’s developmentally appropriate? When is a kid ready to focus away from shiny stuff onto what matters for a good life?

whitepoplar 8y ago
How old are your kids? Any specifics you can give?
- aklemm 8y ago
  8 and 5
  - klodolph 8y ago
    I used to work in informal education with children ages 5-18. I never studied child development but the 5-7 year old kids had to be given a structure just to do basic things like sharing. These kids will straight up lie about things, too. The 5-7 year groups needed staffing levels somewhere around 3:1. It wasn’t until the middle school groups (age 12-14) that you really saw kids with what looked like genuine concern for others, and we ran staffing levels more like 6:1.
    - woogiewonka 8y ago
      I am not an expert on this subject matter but I suspect much of the required structure for younger kids is only a necessity due to constant restrictions and monitoring that's been put in place by modern society. In other words, we are not giving enough space to develop on their own terms and explore their surroundings. I grew up in the 80s and 90s and remember spending a lot of time unsupervised going about wherever and doing all sorts of wild things well before I was 7 years old. Looking back now as a parent it is absolutely terrifying to me what I was "allowed" to do. Then again when I think about the Norma in countries like Japan (where it is not uncommon to see kindergarten kids walking home by themselves and crossing streets and intersections), I am reminded that kids can develop independently to a great tune than we give them credit for. I don't know about Japanese kids materials levels but I've noticed that they are typically given more freedoms to act independently and spend a lot more time on outdoor and social activities. If I had to guess I'd say they are a lot less materialistic than their Western counterparts. As for my own child, I try to let him be independent even at 1 year. For example, we have a TV stand that any parent would be terrified if their kid climbed on it. I was terrified at first but then with some observation and secret supervision I let him climb it. To my surprise he quickly learned how to turn around and get down safely. There was only a single time when he fell from it sideways unhurt, but now he goes up and down like a pro without any supervision. I can leave the room knowing he will always get down fine. To what effect independence will have an impact on materialism remains to be seen but I suspect one of the commenters is right on the money with mirroring behavior and values.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

roenxi 8y ago

By the metrics, the most generous person in the world is Bill Gates who has given away something approaching 30 billion dollars. Maybe there is an argument that he isn't materialistic, but I think the evidence is against that. I suspect they are misusing "materialist" in this context and they meant "selfish". The link is selfishness causes materialism, not materialism causes selfishness.

Godel_unicode 8y ago
I think it's very possible that he was materialistic earlier in life, and now that he's got some experience winning at money he's not and is on to generosity.
rdlecler1 8y ago
There is absolute and relative generosity. On absolute terms Bill is the most generous. On relative terms even after giving away $30b he still has more money than he could ever spend so there is really no personal sacrifice made.
- x220 8y ago
  Actually, on relative terms I think he has given away roughly half the money he has ever earned, which makes him exceptionally generous relatively speaking.
  - nielsbot 8y ago
    "earned" seems a bit loaded for this discussion--a lot of this is paper money, no? But 50% of wealth ever possessed, sure.
    - x220 8y ago
      He absolutely earned all of it.
  - ben_w 8y ago
    I stopped calling myself Christian as a result of reading the Bible, but it does have some interesting takes on this topic: “””Amen, I say to you, this poor widow put in more than all the other contributors to the treasury. For they have all contributed from their surplus wealth, but she, from her poverty, has contributed all she had, her whole livelihood.””” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesson_of_the_widow%27s_mite https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesson_of_the_widow%27s_mite

anonu 8y ago

tldr: get your kid to express some gratitude. Eg: reflect around the dinner table and be thankful for the food.

lihaciudaniel 8y ago
I will agree so, since I discovered this and how this and positivity affect my perception I practice it daily like a meditative practice . basically it prolongs your instant gratification.

analyst74 8y ago

What I realized as I get older and have met many different people, is that, everyone, is, judgmental. Of course, different people value different things. Some judge by wealth, some by looks, some by height, skin color, hobby, manner, education, intellect, family background, job, way you speak, way you act, etc, etc. Why are some judgmental criterias more acceptable than others? I mean, compared to many of the less change-able traits like look, skin color, where you are from, intelligence, etc, isn't wealth, being acquire-able, a somewhat more "fair" criteria to be judged on?

philipov 8y ago
No, because wealth is not fairly distributed. The biggest predictor of wealth is being born rich. Looking at only the best case is not sufficient to call a criterion "fair."
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- Godel_unicode 8y ago
  The operative word being "more". If you agree with gp that people are going to be judgy, which I do, then what we're looking for is least-bad.
  - learc83 8y ago
    >then what we're looking for is least-bad. Wealth certainly isn't the least-bad. Also I haven't seen any evidence that encouraging people to judge others by one metric discourages them from judging people by other metrics.
    - simonh 8y ago
      This is an important point. The implicit assumption of the OP, “if we’re going to judge in one thing” is bogus. Why do we have to judge on only one thing? Why can’t we judge different traits and characteristics based on different metrics? What does material wealth tell us about someone? What is it about them we are judging?

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

edoo 8y ago

Very interesting. It is worth noting that Marxism is rooted in being entitled instead of having gratitude.

x220 8y ago
I think that's a massive oversimplification. You could definitely say that people starving feel entitled to food, and feel justified in stealing it. You could also say that an ideology that can be used to explain every power struggle and social ill is very attractive to those who are too smart for their own good.
- edoo 8y ago
  Most Marxist revolutions involved attacking the producers which did lead to starvation. Just because there are people in the world doing better than you does not automatically mean you are being oppressed. The idea you are entitled to what other people have is absolutely the root of Marxism.
  - tomhoward 8y ago
    I don't think entitlement is as tightly coupled with a single economic philosophy as you'd like to think. Yes there is entitlement evident in the example you're citing, but there's plenty of entitlement evident in other scenarios – e.g., colonialism, feudalism, the behaviour of banking executives in the 2008 financial crisis. It'd be neat if we could simply assign a single political/economic philosophy as being the one that's characterised by entitlement, but like most things in life, the reality is rather more complex.
  - x220 8y ago
    >Most Marxist revolutions involved attacking the producers which did lead to starvation. Yes. > Just because there are people in the world doing better than you does not automatically mean you are being oppressed. Certainly. >The idea you are entitled to what other people have is absolutely the root of Marxism. Here is where I disagree. I think Marxism is fundamentally the idea that all significant suffering in the world is caused by wealthy elites exploiting common people, and that sufficiently eliminating this exploitation will lead to a utopia. It's more than a simple "Give me that!" urge. How else could it be so superficially appealing to naive college students for centuries of history? Don't take this as justification for Marxism. It's not. Marxism is one level above Nazism in a level of evil (if it's not evil, what else could you call evil?) since Nazism eventually demonizes everyone who looks or acts differently than you, but Marxism eventually demonizes (and kills) everyone.

tropo 8y ago

They didn't measure materialism, and very poorly measured generosity. They had some of the participants journal what they were grateful for, they paid all the participants, and they suggested that participants make a supposedly anonymous donation of cash to an unknown cause. Keeping the money is supposedly materialism. No, it is not. Spending the money on frivolous status symbols might be materialism, but that wasn't measured. Keeping the money long-term, or spending it on something of importance, is financially responsible. Giving the money to an unknown cause (might even be an offensive cause) is foolhardy.

exo762 8y ago

Now, what that tells us about action in opposite direction? How to spoil the kid? Tell it that he should feel no gratitude because wealth distribution is random and that hard work, merit, or discipline matter.

woogiewonka 8y ago

I grew up poor and never had a strong desire for material things. I don't know if growing up poor is the reason for this, but I do know that not having access to "fancy" things a kid might have access to, made me spend a lot more time playing outside and keeping occupied with activities. Of course this was all before I had access to a computer. The moment I discovered Age of Empires, I had a strong urge to have my own computer.