Two weeks of gratitude lists led to more positive emotion
Among adults in Brazil, the difference appeared right after the lists ended. Two weeks later, it was no longer distinct from the neutral-list group.
The key idea
The clearest result was an increase in positive emotion right after writing gratitude lists. The other measures did not show an equally strong advantage.
The study, in plain language
A daily list can focus on things we appreciate, problems, or neutral facts. Adults in Brazil were randomly assigned to do one of these activities for two weeks and then report how they felt.
At the end, the gratitude group reported more positive emotion than both comparison groups. Compared with the neutral list, that advantage did not also appear for negative emotion, depressive symptoms, happiness, or life satisfaction. Two weeks later, there was no overall difference from that group, although a difference in positive emotion remained compared with the problem list. Many people stopped submitting lists, and those who dropped out were younger and had less favorable starting scores on several measures, so the results call for caution.
What they found
- Right after the activity, the gratitude group reported more positive emotion than the other two groups.
- Compared with the neutral list, there was no advantage in negative emotion, depressive symptoms, happiness, or life satisfaction.
- Two weeks later, there was no overall difference between gratitude and the neutral list.
How they studied it
Adults in Brazil were randomly assigned to write gratitude lists, problem lists, or neutral-fact lists for 14 days. They completed questionnaires before the activity, at the end, and two weeks later.
What the study cannot show
- Many people left the study before providing final data.
- The sample was voluntary and online, and measures relied on self-reports.
- The trial did not evaluate clinical treatment or lasting effects.
The original study
Positive Psychology and Gratitude Interventions: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Source under CC BY 4.0. English adaptation and explanation by PaperFlow, with AI assistance. The text has been reorganized for a general audience; it is not the complete paper and does not imply endorsement by its authors.
One study alone does not represent a field's consensus. Educational content does not replace professional advice. Report a possible error.
