The positive psychology movement has spurred multiple lines of research devoted to studying how close relationships are beneficial to people’s lives. These relationships seem to provide psychological nourishment, giving people motivation and confidence to branch out, take risks, and live a more optimal life. Some popular sitcoms are used to demonstrate the overlap between dynamics of careers and social bonds, illustrating how relationships and work are not separate, but intertwined.

As noted by distinguished theorists (Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000), the field of psychology has tended to focus its attention on the grim and painful aspects of life (such as mental disorders, terror management, and prejudice), and how to repair or diminish them. Although these are very important topics for scientific study, some psychologists have argued that this research focus is too narrow, almost exclusively centered on human suffering. Popular media often reiterates this spotlight on negative aspects of human mentality and behavior, with TV shows like In Treatment, Lost, and CSI. In pop culture, psychology is most often synonymous with pain and adversity.

Positive psychology (Keyes & Haidt, 2003; Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000) offers another perspective, which is the study of life’s brighter side. Positive psychology focuses on pleasant and desirable emotions (happiness), social bonding (love), growth (exploration) and optimal functioning (achievement). In particular, positive psychology provides an important contribution to the scientific study of close relationships. Such research focuses on how friendships, romantic bonds, and social networks fulfill basic human needs (similar to the need for food & water), offer comfort and security, and assist in growth and development. Relationships are a great source of happiness and well-being, and offer a psychological “boost” which helps people live bigger and richer lives than they otherwise would alone.

Some notable and popular television shows depict these beneficial aspects of relationships, and examples from three sitcoms will be used to highlight the psychological concepts discussed throughout the article. That 70s Show portrays a band of teenagers living in Wisconsin in the late 1970s. Entourage portrays L.A. life for a movie star and his all-male friends, highlighting the career and personal life of a fictional celebrity, Vincent Chase. How I Met Your Mother portrays a group of 20-something New Yorkers, who journey through their careers and relationships together. Across these different settings and demographics, the characters provide support, feel deep affection for each other, and help each other flourish. They are a pop culture embodiment of positive psychology.

Self-Determination Theory

Motivation and goal-striving are important factors that drive people to live successful and fulfilling lives. According to Self-Determination Theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 1985; Ryan & Deci, 2000), motivation and goal-striving are tied to three specific innate psychological needs: relatedness, competence, and autonomy. Relatedness refers to the state of being connected to others (family, friends, partners, etc.), competence refers to the state of being effective and capable, and autonomy refers to feeling in control over actions and outcomes.

These needs are the psychological equivalent of physical survival needs (water, sleep, shelter). Put another way, they are like psychological “food,” and when they are properly satisfied, people can function at an optimal level. Optimal functioning is indicated by interest/engagement, effort in one’s pursuits, creativity, mastering skills, achieving goals, and an overall feeling of psychological health and well-being. In contrast, when these needs are not met, people feel apathetic and passive, which can have deleterious effects on performance in a variety of domains.

What some psychologists call the need for relatedness, others may label the need for social connection (Andersen, Chen, & Carter, 2000), secure relatedness (Ryan & La Guardia, 2000), the need to belong (Baumeister & Leary, 1995), or the need to form attachment bonds (Bowlby, 1969/1982). They refer to the same notion that humans are essentially social creatures, and that close bonds (especially with friends & family) are a psychological necessity. Almost all television sitcoms revolve around the relationships between friends and lovers. Eric’s life-long friendship and adolescent romance with Donna is in the spotlight for nearly the entire plot of That 70s Show. While the show contains a variety of details (e.g. music and culture from the 1970s), its central focus is the love that these two characters share. How I Met Your Mother showcases the importance of relatedness/belonging with a different twist; centering on Ted’s journey to find “the one” (his soul mate and life partner) that he will end up with, as his wife and mother of his future children. Along the way, there is much attention given to Ted’s best friend Marshall and his wife Lily, who manifest Ted’s ideal relationship that he hopes to have in the future. In each of these sitcoms, the emphasis on close relationships is clear: they are the most important facets of the characters’ lives.

Relationships and social networks are also a strong predictor of psychological health and well-being. The more (and better quality) friendships people have, the happier they feel, and the more satisfied they are with their lives (Diener & Seligman, 2002). A diary study showed that on any given day, people who had engaged in meaningful social interactions (e.g., hanging out with friends, meaningful conversations, doing fun activities) felt happier and more spirited than those without such interactions (Reis, Sheldon, Gable, Roscoe, & Ryan, 2000). Notably, there is a weaker association between financial wealth and psychological well-being. This suggests that although basic physical needs (food, shelter) must be met, excess money really can’t buy happiness (see Myers, 2000). As an example of this, in Entourage, at the height of Vince’s career, he found himself alone on a few occasions lamenting having all the money/toys in the world but no one to “play with.” Being alone in a luxurious mansion was not enough to satisfy ones’ psychological needs.

Competence is similar to elf-efficacy, which is a person’s sense of their own abilities in a given situation or task (Bandura, 1977; 1996). When people feel competent, they perform well, and close relationships can greatly facilitate this feeling of capability. People who form secure attachments to others (Hazan & Shaver, 1987; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007) are comfortable becoming close to their partners and friends, and relying on them for support. Those who are securely attached in their relationships do not avoid intimacy, but embrace it. This comfort in close relationships gives them confidence to grow and explore their environment. In other words, having greater security in the support of friends and partners leads to more positive engagement with the world, and a more successful life.

Research has shown that securely attached people are more satisfied at work and feel more career/job security (as opposed to insecurely-attached people). They also do not allow work to jeopardize their personal relationships (Hazan & Shaver, 1990), and do not experience negative “spillover” between work and family life (Sumer & Knight, 2001). In contrast, people who are insecure in their relationships (either avoidant or anxious individuals) experience more fear of failure, and are more prone to resist challenging yet potentially rewarding activities (Elliot & Reis, 2003). In sum, people who are comfortable and secure in their relationships benefit from a significant psychological boost in their work ethic and courage.

People rely on their close friends and romantic partners to help them achieve and prosper through a process known as exploration from a secure base (Bowlby, 1988; Feeney & Van Vleet, 2010). Based on Feeney’s (2004) Circle of Security model, when romantic partners and close friends are encouraging and supportive, this facilitates people’s ability to accomplish goals, explore personal growth, learn, engage the environment, and live a fuller and richer life. According to Feeney and Thrush (2010), people demonstrate support for their romantic partners’ exploration by displaying availability, noninterference, and encouragement. Having a partner or close friend demonstrate these three behaviors is associated with greater personal goal persistence, enthusiasm for one’s activities, and successful performance.

In Entourage, Vince’s friends all have had a significant part to play in his star success. Eric performed an instrumental role as his manager, helping the tangible aspects of producing films. Drama (the older brother) filled a different supporting role, by taking his brother into his home (after Vince sold his house in order to fund a film). Turtle is the designated driver, and a “good-luck charm.” Vince does not hesitate to depend on his friends for support, which is the crucial ingredient that allows him to thrive. In return, Vince also supports his friends’ goal and ambitions (see Autonomy below).

On How I Met Your Mother, Ted experienced a period of uncertainty in his career as an architect, after he lost his job and attempted to start his own business (which failed). When Ted was presented with an opportunity to take a new career path, which seemed more challenging but possibly more rewarding, he expressed self-doubt. His friends encouraged him to take the chance and venture out into new territory, and it paid off. Ted discovered his true career calling with his friends’ support. On That 70s Show, the characters displayed similar interpersonal support. Kelso is the fun and free-spirited friend in the group, but also half-witted and reckless. No one expected him to amount to much in his life, until he was accepted into the police academy. His friends, Eric, Hyde and Fez were supportive and encouraging, but before leaving, Kelso felt overwhelmed and nearly gave up altogether. His friends came to his aid, and intervened with positive support, giving him the confidence to move forward with his career.

Another way in which confidence and competence can be boosted is through capitalization (Gable, Gonzaga, & Strachman, 2006; Langston, 1994). Capitalization happens when people share good news with close friends and romantic partners, who in turn respond in an active way so as to maximize the benefits of the event. Capitalizing on positive events increases positive emotion and psychological well-being over and above the actual events themselves (Gable, Reis, Impett, & Asher, 2004). Hyde (like Kelso), never had high expectations for himself, and when he received a high SAT score, he briefly mentioned it in passing to his girlfriend Jackie, not expecting a big reaction. Jackie, however, responded in an overtly positive way. She saw the high score as Hyde’s potential for success, so she cheered him on. Her encouragement propelled him to pursue bigger and better things in his life.

Autonomy

Autonomy stems from a person’s feeling of control over their actions, and is synonymous with independence. When people feel autonomous, they feel in control of their actions and outcomes. The need for autonomy feeds directly into the feeling of vitality and psychological well-being. People need to feel “in charge” of their own lives, because this provides the motivation to take chances, work hard and prosper. Research has shown that when people are free to choose how they solve problems on a cognitive task, they feel greater vitality than if they are given specific directions on how to solve the same problems, regardless of their success (Nix, Ryan, Manly, & Deci, 1999).

It may seem as though being too closely connected to others can interfere with one’s sense of personal control and responsibility. However, psychological research has shown that close relationships are very beneficial not only in boosting people’s competence but their autonomy as well. It would be maladaptive to resist closeness and dependency in relationships, given their positive potential for assistance, guidance, and support. Surprisingly, when people accept the fact that they are dependent on others, they actually feel more autonomous and independent. Psychologists refer to this as the dependency paradox (Feeney, 2007). Research has shown that the degree to which people accept dependence on close others for support, they engage in more independent exploration and achieve more goals on their own (Feeney, 2007).

On How I Met Your Mother, Robin is a job-focused woman who tends to resist closeness and intimacy out of fear that she will lose autonomy and her career will falter. Throughout the series, she accepts job offers all over the globe in pursuit of success, leaving her friends and home behind. However, none of those paths seem fulfilling to her, and as she lets herself grow more intimate with others, she begins to see the value of close relationships and how they allow her to flourish in her career. Robin ultimately chooses to remain in New York with her close friends and boyfriend, viewing them as her source of inspiration.

When close friends equally support each other’s independence, they display mutuality of autonomy support. Research has shown that mutuality of autonomy support is good for relationships. Having autonomy support from friends is associated with higher friendship quality/satisfaction and higher general psychological well-being (Deci, La Guardia, Moller, Scheiner, & Ryan, 2006). When relationships are successful in terms providing warmth and support, this helps increase individuals’ feelings of self-efficacy and competence (La Guardia, Ryan, Couchamn, & Deci, 2000).

The characters in Entourage displayed this mechanism, when Vince achieved the peak of his career and there was no longer such great need to have Turtle and Eric close at hand. They both felt compelled to venture out and work towards living their own optimal lives. Turtle wanted to start his own business, and Eric wanted to work toward a promising career as a talent manager and start a family. Neither Turtle nor Eric was content to ride Vince’s coattails; they each wanted an independent life of their own, while maintaining their close friendships. Vince supported their aspirations for autonomy, recognizing how this would help them achieve their personal life goals.

Conclusion

The positive psychology movement has spurred multiple lines of research devoted to studying how close relationships are beneficial to people’s lives. These relationships provide psychological nourishment, giving people motivation and confidence to branch out, take risks, and live a more optimal life. The characters on That 70s Show, Entourage, and How I Met Your Mother exhibit many of these behavioral mechanisms. While they playfully badger each other, they also provide instrumental and emotional support, which allows each of them to flourish in their life pursuits. These shows also demonstrate the overlap between dynamics of careers and social bonds, illustrating how relationships and work are not separate, but intertwined. The deep interpersonal bonds of friendship and love cut across all of life’s variables. The characters display the meaning of close relationships: they are the backbone of the life well-lived.

References

Andersen, S., Chen, S., & Carter, C. (2000). Fundamental human needs: Making social cognition relevant. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 269-275.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.

Bandura, A. (1996). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497-529.

Bowlby, J. (1969/1982). Attachment and loss, Vol. 1: Attachment. New York: Basic Books.

Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Parent-child attachment and healthy human development. New York, NY US: Basic Books.

Deci, E. L., La Guardia, J. G., Moller, A. C., Scheiner, M. J., & Ryan, R. M. (2006). On the benefits of giving as well as receiving autonomy support: Mutuality in close friendships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(3), 313-327.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.

Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Very happy people. Psychological Science, 13(1), 81-84.

Elliot, A. J., & Reis, H. T. (2003). Attachment and exploration in adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 317-331.

Feeney, B. C. (2004). A secure base: Responsive support of goal strivings and exploration in adult intimate relationships.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(5), 631-648.

Feeney, B. (2007). The dependency paradox in close relationships: Accepting dependence promotes independence.em>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(2), 268-285.

Feeney, B. C., & Van Vleet, M. (2010). Growing through attachment: The interplay of attachment and exploration in adulthood. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27(2), 226-234.

Feeney, B. C., & Thrush, R. (2010). Relationship influences on exploration in adulthood: The characteristics and function of a secure base. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(1), 57-76.

Gable, S. L., Gonzaga, G. C., & Strachman, A. (2006). Will you be there for me when things go right? Supportive responses to positive event disclosures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91 (5), 904-917.

Gable, S. L., Reis, H. T., Impett, E., & Asher, E. R. (2004). What do you do when things go right? The intrapersonal and interpersonal benefits of sharing positive events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87 (2), 228–245.

Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 511-524.

Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1990). Love and work: An attachment-theoretical perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(2), 270-280.

Keyes, C. L., & Haidt, J. (2003). Positive psychology: The study of ‘that which makes life worthwhile.’ In C. L. Keyes & J. Haidt (Eds.) Flourishing: Positive psychology and the life well lived. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

La Guardia, J. G., Ryan, R. M., Couchman, C. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Within-person variation in security of attachment: A self-determination theory perspective on attachment, need fulfillment, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(3), 367-384.

Langston, C. A. (1994). Capitalizing on and coping with daily-life events: Expressive responses to positive events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67 (6), 1112–1125.

Myers, D. G. (2000). The funds, friends, and faith of happy people.American Psychologist, 55(1), 56-67.

Myers, D. G., & Diener, E. (1995). Who is happy? Psychological Science, 6(1), 10-19.

Nix, G., Ryan, R. M., Manly, J. B., & Deci, E. L. (1999) Revitalization through self-regulation: The effects of autonomous and controlled motivation on happiness and vitality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 266–284.

Reis, H., Sheldon, K., Gable, S., Roscoe, J., & Ryan, R. (2000). Daily well-being: The role of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(4), 419-435.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.

Ryan, R., & La Guardia, J. (2000). What is being optimized?: Self-determination theory and basic psychological needs. In S. H. Qualls & N. Abeles (Eds.) Psychology and the aging revolution: How we adapt to longer life (pp. 145-172). Washington, DC US: American Psychological Association.

Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5-14.

Sumer, H., & Knight, P. (2001). How do people with different attachment styles balance work and family? A personality perspective on work–family linkage. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(4), 653-663.