Definition
The hedonic treadmill is a metaphor for a psychological phenomenon where individuals attempt to create various positive experiences to increase their happiness. However, these efforts are typically successful only for a short period, as individuals eventually return to their baseline level of subjective well-being. This return to equilibrium is due to hedonic adaptation, a process in which people become accustomed to positive (and negative) stimuli, leading to a diminished emotional impact over time. Hedonic adaptation to positive circumstances is significant at the individual level, presenting a substantial obstacle to enhancing and sustaining long-term happiness.
The consequences of this continual pursuit of enhanced well-being are evident at both social and economic levels. Many individuals perceive material possessions as a means to enhance satisfaction, making the hedonic treadmill a critical mechanism driving consumer behavior. In an attempt to boost their happiness, individuals purchase material goods, experiencing a temporary increase in satisfaction. When this satisfaction wanes, they make subsequent purchases, mistakenly believing that their long-term well-being can be significantly influenced by individual purchasing decisions. The hedonic treadmill is further amplified by marketing strategies that encourage consumption, thus creating a feedback loop where consumer desires not only drive the market but are also driven by it.
History
The term “hedonic treadmill” was first introduced in the 1970s by psychologist Philip Brickman and colleagues, whose research has been instrumental in shaping contemporary understandings of happiness (Brickman et al., 1978). In their study, they assessed the happiness levels of individuals who had, for example, recently won large sums in the lottery, or experienced life-altering accidents resulting in paraplegia. Although notable changes in happiness levels were expected for the lottery winners and accident victims (an increase and decrease, respectively), all groups reported similar moderate levels of life satisfaction. The authors explained this unexpected result through the theory of habituation to sensory stimuli, which posits that responses to repeated stimuli diminish over time. This led them to the rather pessimistic conclusion that “the nature of [adaptation] condemns men to live on a hedonic treadmill, to seek new levels of stimulation merely to maintain old levels of subjective pleasure, to never achieve any kind of permanent happiness”.
The concept of the hedonic treadmill, and happiness more broadly, has long been studied primarily by psychologists. Toward the end of the 20th century, it began to garner interest from other disciplines. Economists believe that it could explain the “Easterlin Paradox”, a phenomenon observed in wealthy countries where, beyond a certain point, increased income does not necessarily correlate with greater happiness. In the early 20th century, sociologist and philosopher Zygmunt Bauman (2001) also addressed the hedonic treadmill, describing it as one of the main mechanisms sustaining consumer society, which “thrives as long as it manages to render the non-satisfaction of its members”.
These findings on the hedonic treadmill have recently raised concerns among policymakers that efforts to increase income in affluent countries may not enhance psychological well-being. Therefore, in some views, policy efforts should focus rather on strengthening factors with a more significant impact on happiness (such as enhancing social relationships; see Well-being Economy).
Different Perspectives
Since the introduction of hedonic treadmill theory, numerous studies have suggested that it requires significant modifications (mainly related to the drivers of the treadmill, its valence, and the possibility of controlling this process). One such modification pertains to the mechanism underlying the hedonic treadmill. Critics point out that hedonic adaptation encompasses a wide range of processes beyond mere sensory adaptation. According to Daniel Kahneman (2000), aspiration levels may provide an alternative explanation for the hedonic treadmill. As individuals become accustomed to positive circumstances, they begin to perceive them as a standard. In other words, as our standard of living rises, so do our expectations. Social comparisons may also influence this process (see Social Norms). When determining aspiration levels, individuals often make upward social comparisons, assessing their circumstances against those they perceive to be better off. As economic well-being increases population-wide, not only do individual situations improve but so do those of comparison groups, perpetually elevating aspiration levels. Hedonic adaptation may also be linked to boredom – a sense of dissatisfaction, lack of interest, and low arousal, which drive people to look for new stimuli.
It is also essential to consider the asymmetry between reactions to negative and positive events when discussing the hedonic treadmill. Although hedonic adaptation to negative circumstances can be beneficial, it is relatively slow, and individuals may never fully return to baseline happiness levels after life events such as unemployment, divorce, or disability. In contrast, hedonic adaptation to positive events occurs quickly and is more likely to be complete.
Sonja Lyubomirsky (2011) offers another significant modification to the concept of the hedonic treadmill. She posits that individuals can exert control over this process through intentional and effortful activities, such as redefining the goals of consumption (e.g., using it for intangible life experiences, enhancing social relationships, or skill development).
Applications
The market drivers and consequences of the hedonic treadmill: The hedonic treadmill persists not only due to the human pursuit of happiness but also because it is accelerated by market forces utilizing the four Ps of marketing (product, price, place, and promotion) (see Advertising). For example, the clothing industry has expedited production to offer new styles rapidly, moving from fast fashion to even ultra-fast fashion, thereby stimulating consumer boredom with existing garments. The rapid advancement of new technologies leads to electronic products becoming perceived as obsolete shortly after purchase (see Product Returns and Right of Withdrawal). Marketing messages use the term “new” even for old products in updated packaging. As the hedonic treadmill may be limited by budget constraints, consumers are frequently offered installment or deferred payment options to facilitate their purchasing decisions.
These marketing strategies boost the hedonic treadmill, which has resulted in tremendous consumption growth, with its destructive impacts on the global environment (see Consumerism). On the individual and societal levels, it also led to the focus on materialistic aims which is proven to be negatively correlated with well-being (see Box 4.1).
Box 4.1 Materialists and the consumer culture
Materialism is a concept that applies both at the individual level and at societal and cultural levels. On an individual level, materialism refers to the importance people place on the acquisition and possession of goods, coupled with a tendency to view the acquisition as essential for achieving important goals and desired outcomes. A highly materialistic person believes that acquiring material goods is the primary goal in life, the main determinant of success, and the key to happiness and self-identity. For materialists, “to be” is essentially “to have”.
Although materialists often believe that material goods will enhance their happiness, research suggests the opposite is true (see Well-being and Life Satisfaction Versus Income). Numerous studies on materialism (see Belk, 2015) have shown that it is associated with dissatisfaction – whether with one’s standard of living, the amount of enjoyment in life, or with their life as a whole. Instead of feeling content with what they have, materialists tend to focus on what they lack, making them less likely to appreciate the positive aspects of their lives. Furthermore, materialism is linked to lower levels of interpersonal trust and shorter, lower-quality relationships.
Materialism also operates at a societal and cultural level, where it is referred to as consumer culture or consumerism. Consumer culture can be broadly defined as a culture in which goals and activities are centered around the purchase and consumption of goods (Belk, 2015). In such a culture, the possession of goods becomes a measure of success and self-worth (see Conspicuous/Positional Consumption). People are judged by what they own, not by who they are. Those who own branded and luxury goods are seen as more successful, while those unable to keep up with the latest consumer trends are often looked down upon. As a result, consumer society is caught up in a perpetual cycle of “keeping up with the Joneses” – constant comparisons with others and endless competition for possessions.
Slowing Down the Hedonic Treadmill: Slowing down the hedonic treadmill requires attention not only at the individual (micro) level but also at the community (meso) and policy (macro) levels. Community-based initiatives can effectively facilitate social practices (see Social Practice Theory) that offer consumers benefits alternative to the pleasure derived from new purchases. For instance, repair cafes are community-driven workshops where people learn to fix goods rather than replace them (see Repair). However, these workshops also provide valuable opportunities to build social relationships and foster local integration. Such cooperative consumption can begin to create social norms that will have the effect of modifying individual behaviors (see Prosumerism and Alternative Consumer Cooperatives).
At the macro level, the hedonic treadmill can be challenged by policies supporting the circular economy, particularly its “Slowing” principle. This principle refers to strategies like designing products to extend their useful lifespans (e.g., with easily repairable components; see Ecodesign) and economic models that encourage a sharing economy (renting and exchanging goods instead of buying the new ones, Kennedy & Linneluecke, 2022). In 2024, the EU adopted two new regulations addressing these issues: the Ecodesign for Sustainable Product Development and the Right-to-Repair Directive. These regulations aim to extend the producer’s responsibility for a product (see Extended Producer Responsibility), but they also facilitate changes in consumption patterns.
Further Reading
Bauman, Z. (2001). Consuming life. Journal of Consumer Culture, 1, 9–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/146954050100100102.
Belk, R. (2015). Culture and materialism. In S. Ng & A. Y. Lee (Eds.), Handbook of culture and consumer behavior, pp. 299–323. Oxford University Press
Brickman, P., Coates, D., & Janoff-Bulman, R. (1978). Lottery winners and accident victims: Is happiness relative? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 917–927. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.36.8.917.
Kahneman, D. (2000). Experienced utility and objective happiness: A moment-based approach. In D. Kahneman & A. Tversky (Eds.), Choices, values and frames, pp. 673–692. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803475.038.
Kennedy, S., & Linnenluecke, M.K. (2022). Circular economy and resilience: A research agenda. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31, 2754–2765. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3004.
Lyubomirsky, S. (2011). Hedonic adaptation to positive and negative experiences. In S. Folkman (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of stress, health, and coping, pp. 200–224. Oxford University Press.