Abstract
The notion of a U shape in happiness—that well-being is highest for people in their 20s, decreases to its nadir in midlife, and then rises into old age—has captured the attention of the media, which often cite it as evidence for a midlife crisis. We argue that support for the purported U shape is not as robust and generalizable as is often assumed and present our case with the following arguments: (a) Cross-sectional studies are inadequate for drawing conclusions about within-person change in happiness across the life span; (b) cross-sectional evidence with respect to the ubiquity and robustness of the U shape in general levels of happiness and life satisfaction is mixed; (c) longitudinal support for the U shape in happiness and life satisfaction is also mixed; (d) longitudinal research on subjective indicators of well-being other than general levels of happiness and life satisfaction challenges the U shape; (e) when asked to reflect on their lives, older adults tend to recall midlife as one of the more positive periods; and (f) a focus on a single trajectory of well-being is of limited scientific and applied value because it obscures the diversity in pathways throughout life as well as its sources. Understanding happiness across the life course and moving the research field forward require a multidisciplinary, collaborative approach.