%0 Journal Article
%T There Is No Empirical Evidence for Critical Positivity Ratios: Comment on Fredrickson (2013)
%A Carol A. Nickerson
%J Journal of Humanistic Psychology
%@ 1552-650X
%D 2018
%R 10.1177/0022167817740468
%X Fredrickson and Losada (American Psychologist, 2005, 60, 678-686) theorized that a ratio of positive affect to negative affect (positivity ratio) of 2.9013 acts as a critical minimum for well-being. Recently, Brown, Sokal, and Friedman (American Psychologist, 2013, 68, 801-813) convincingly demonstrated that the mathematical work underlying this critical minimum positivity ratio was both flawed and misapplied. This comment addresses Fredrickson¡¯s (American Psychologist, 2013, 68, 814-822) insistence that, regardless of the incorrect mathematical work, substantial empirical evidence exists both for critical minimum and maximum positivity ratios and, more generally, for a (unspecified) nonlinear relation between the positivity ratio and well-being, by first noting that there was a mismatch between Fredrickson and Losada¡¯s (2005) theory and the data used to test it, then describing the methodological and statistical problems of Fredrickson and Losada¡¯s empirical study (2005), and, finally, examining the other studies that Fredrickson (2013) cited as empirical evidence
%K across-persons
%K flourishing
%K languishing
%K methodology
%K positivity ratio
%K well-being
%K within-person
%U https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0022167817740468