The wisdom of Goldilocks has been applied to many fields, including astrobiology and economics. It seems that it could even be the basis of our free time.
Researchers discovered that although subjective well-being initially increases with increased free time, this trend doesn't necessarily translate into very high levels or leisure.
According to Dr Marissa Sharif (a co-author of this study at the University of Pennsylvania), the sweet spot is a moderate amount of time. Our findings showed that too much time is associated with lower subjective well-being due to a lack of purpose and productivity.
Sharif and his colleagues published their analysis of results from two large-scale surveys that surveyed more than 35,000 people.
One was the American Time Use Survey. It was conducted between 2012 and 2013. Participants were asked what they did in the last 24 hours.
The team gathered opinions from the public on what activities should be considered leisure time, and calculated this time for each participant. They found that subjective wellbeing increased with more free time, but dropped once it reached five hours.
Data from the National Study of the Changing Workforce between 1992 and 2008 showed that more time is not associated with greater subjective well-being. However, it didn't dip because very few participants reported more than five hours of unpaid time each day.
According to the team, the American Time Use Survey suggests that how people spend their leisure time matters.
While a high amount of time spent on nonproductive and solo activities can have a negative impact on subjective well-being, it is not as bad as spending too much time on productive or social activities.
In an effort to verify that the results were not just down to people with depression finding themselves with large amounts free of time, the team conducted two online experiments with data from 4,046 and 2,565 Americans.
Participants were asked to think about how they would use a set amount of time each day. One experiment focused on whether the time was used for productive and meaningful activities and another examined whether it was wasted.
When compared to the team's imagined feelings of well-being, productivity, stress and wellbeing, more time is not always better. On a seven-point scale, the team found that while hypothetical productive time increased from moderate to high levels, it did not equal imagined wellbeing. However, this was 0.4 more than for moderate non-productive time.
According to the team, the effect size was small and optimal time for the effect was not exact.
However, the study suggested that people who feel too busy should not abandon all their obligations and instead find a few leisure hours each day. Those with empty days can spend their time doing things that are productive or connecting with others.
Andrew Oswald, an economist and behavioural scientist at the University of Warwick, was happy to be part of the research.
This study is very valuable because it offers all kinds of statistical evidence to support a very intuitive idea: Human beings like to have spare time for leisure, chores at home, and hobbies. But not too much, he stated. This is a Goldilocks outcome on time.
