Cross-Cultural Differences in the Pursuit of Happiness

Do we all experience happiness in the same way?

Many of us have felt happiness. And yet, the moment we try to define it, things get slippery. Happiness is deeply subjective, shaped by personal history and lived circumstances, and there is no single definition that fits everyone. This becomes even clearer when we look beyond the individual and consider the influence of language, culture, socio-economic context, spirituality, and geography. Whether we are shaped by the country we grew up in—or by the one we currently live in—our understanding of happiness might evolve.

Happiness has been treated as a universal destination: measurable, comparable, and equally desirable for everyone.

Global rankings and popular advice often assume that what makes one person happy should work for all. Yet research across psychology and anthropology tells a more nuanced story. Cultures do not all seek the same emotional states in order to be well, nor do they agree on what a “good life” should feel like. Definitions of happiness vary across cultures and historical periods, reflecting deeper value systems rather than simple emotional preferences (Oishi et al., 2013). What emerges instead is a mosaic of ways of being well—different priorities, different ideals, different criteria.

These differences not only exist between countries, but also within them. Social class, generation, migration status, and minority identity shape how wellbeing is understood inside the same society. Research shows that even within a single culture, people pursue happiness differently depending on social roles and relational orientation (Ford et al., 2015). Language further deepens this variation, especially among bilingual and multilingual individuals, who often experience emotions differently depending on the language they are using (Dewaele, 2010).

Some languages make distinctions that others blur. In Spanish, the difference between “soy feliz” and “estoy feliz” separates happiness as a more enduring life condition from happiness as a temporary emotional state. Russian uses two common words: schastye, referring to deep life fulfillment, and radost’, referring to momentary joy (Ford et al., 2015). English, however, frequently uses “happiness” to capture both immediate emotional experience and reflective life evaluation.

I have personally struggled with feeling the concept of happiness in French. The words used—bonheur, understood as something lasting, and joie, understood as fleeting—do not quite land in my body. They don’t feel as vivid or as expansive to me as “happiness / I’m happy” or “felicidad / estoy feliz / me siento feliz.” That experience made me more attentive to how language does not just describe wellbeing; it quietly shapes what we interpret and somatically feel as “happiness.”

As we will see, cultures do not define happiness in the same way. What constitutes a good life in one context may differ markedly in another, shaped by shared values, language, and everyday practices. These variations influence not only how happiness is experienced, but also which emotions are socially rewarded.

In countries such as the United States, Canada, and Australia, happiness is often associated with excitement, enthusiasm, visible positivity, and achievement. These cultures tend to value energy, motivation, and emotional expressiveness, reflecting what Jeanne Tsai calls high-arousal ideal affect—the emotional states people want to feel, not just those they do feel (Tsai, 2007). They place greater value on independence and self-confidence, and feeling good about oneself is more directly connected to life satisfaction (Choi & Choi, 2025). 

In contrast, research in East Asian contexts such as Japan and Taiwan indicates a cultural preference for low-arousal positive states, including calm and balance (Tsai et al., 2006). For these cultures, fulfilling social responsibilities matters more than promoting a positive self-image (Choi & Choi, 2025). 

Studies of Japanese conceptions of happiness highlight the importance of relational harmony and emotional moderation rather than visible exuberance (Uchida & Kitayama, 2009). At the same time, not all relationship-oriented cultures function in the same way: in Latin America, for example, strong social bonds often coexist with greater emotional expressiveness and mutual affirmation. This suggests that happiness depends less on whether a culture is individualistic or collectivist and more on how it shapes self-worth and social connection (Choi & Choi, 2025).

Nordic countries, the Netherlands, and Switzerland tend to associate reliable social networks and institutional trust with higher life evaluations. For them, stability and predictability function as structural foundations of wellbeing (World Happiness Report, 2024, Chapters 1–2). 

Other cultures conceive humans as inseparable from land, community, and ecological systems, framing wellbeing as relational and embedded within a larger web of life. 

Research with Inuit communities in Nunatsiavut describes mental wellness as holistic and relational, closely connected to land, community, culture, and traditional practices (Middleton et al., 2020). Wellbeing is understood as balance across physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual dimensions, shaped by cultural identity within broader historical and social contexts. Similarly, research with Anishinaabe Elders portrays wellbeing as grounded in spiritual connectedness, cultural continuity, and relationships with land, ancestors, and community (Gonzalez et al., 2023).

In both perspectives, wellbeing is articulated through collective and relational dimensions, framing it as embedded in enduring relationships, collective memory, and cultural continuity.

As we can see, cultures are not chasing the same emotional destination. Some seek excitement, others calm; some prioritize autonomy, others belonging; some value meaning, others stability; some pursue economic growth, others cultivate spiritual connection. Each reflects a distinct vision of what it means to live well — and each carries trade-offs. When one model is treated as universal, the costs can surface as burnout in contexts where constant positivity is expected, alienation where individual achievement overrides community, or quiet disengagement when emotional norms feel misaligned. In multicultural settings, these tensions may even lead to emotional suppression or identity fragmentation.

As a Mexican living in the French-speaking part of Switzerland, I have experienced cross-cultural differences in how we understand death, raise children, and express emotions. In addition, I am also an expressive and emotional person, which sometimes disrupts the status quo in a society where neutrality is praised. With my entire family of origin in Mexico, cultural distance has not always been easy. At times, I have felt loneliness when questioning my cultural instincts, beliefs, and way of being while living in a country that is not the one of my birth. Feeling different has, at times, been challenging. 

My relational warmth has occasionally been read as excessive and sometimes misinterpreted. On the other hand, I perceive Swiss equanimity as cold and distant. We are all pursuing wellbeing, but through different cultural norms. Without cultural fluency, each of us risks being judged by standards shaped in a different cultural context, which might also be counterproductive in professional environments.

A future that takes wellbeing seriously will not demand emotional uniformity. It will recognize that there are multiple legitimate ways of living well, each shaped by history, culture, and context. When we impose a single ideal of happiness, we do not elevate humanity—we marginalize difference and generate quiet forms of suffering.

For leaders, coaches, and organizations working across cultures, misunderstanding cultural conceptions of happiness may create misalignment, disengagement, or unintended exclusion. Global leadership today requires more than inclusion policies; it requires literacy in cultural models of wellbeing. The question is no longer “How do we make people happier?” but “Which form of wellbeing allows these individuals, in this context, to function, belong, and thrive?” When people feel that their way of being well is not corrected but understood, safety grows. And where there is safety, trust follows — and where there is trust, people do not just perform; they belong and flourish.

References

Choi, H., & Choi, E. (2025). Unraveling why happiness levels vary across cultures: Mechanisms underlying East–West differences. Social and Personality Psychology Compass. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.70078

Dewaele, J.-M. (2010). Emotions in multiple languages. Palgrave Macmillan.

Ford, B. Q., Dmitrieva, J. O., Heller, D., Chentsova-Dutton, Y. E., Grossmann, I., Tamir, M., & Mauss, I. B. (2015). Culture shapes whether the pursuit of happiness predicts higher or lower well-being. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(6), 1053–1062. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000108

Gonzalez, M., Steinberg, R. I., Bruce, F., Ullrich, J. S., & Walls, M. L. (2023). Indigenous Elders' conceptualization of wellbeing: An Anishinaabe worldview perspective. International Journal of Indigenous Health, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.32799/ijih.v18i1.39518

Middleton, J., Cunsolo, A., Jones-Bitton, A., Wright, C. J., Harper, S. L., & Ford, J. D. (2020). Indigenous mental wellness in Nunatsiavut, Labrador: Perspectives from Inuit youth. Social Science & Medicine, 258, 113096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113096

Oishi, S., Graham, J., Kesebir, S., & Galinha, I. C. (2013). Concepts of happiness across time and cultures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(5), 559–577. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213480042

Tsai, J. L., Knutson, B., & Fung, H. H. (2006). Cultural variation in affect valuation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(2), 288–307. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.2.288

Tsai, J. L. (2007). Ideal affect: Cultural causes and behavioral consequences. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2(3), 242–259. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00043.x

Uchida, Y., & Kitayama, S. (2009). Happiness and unhappiness in East and West: Themes and variations. Emotion, 9(4), 441–456. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015634

World Happiness Report. (2024). World happiness report 2024. Sustainable Development Solutions Network. https://worldhappiness.report/ed/2024/

About the Author

Dení Vázquez Ackermann is a co-author of The Happiness of Coaching. She studied communications, has an MA in Public Image Engineering, is a Whole Person Certified Coach and a Certified Happiness Trainer. After several years in the luxury industry, during a period of hardship, Dení discovered the essential role of gratitude, purpose, and meaning in life. She realized how important it was to add different components to a "magic pill" that would help her and her colleagues to avoid burnout and enhance self-satisfaction. This journey led her to the science of happiness, where she found her true calling. In this article, she shares her transformative process and insights. Find out more at: https://www.denivazquez.com/

Photo credit: cottonbro studio: https://www.pexels.com/ru-ru/photo/4972911/