THE RECENT GLOOMINESS in Hong Kong begs the question, why do Hong Kong's least well off look the happiest? On the average day in Hong Kong, noted the Economist, the mood in Central is set by the Chinese, famously cranky and often rude, and expatriate executives, permanently stressed. On Sunday, on the other hand, picnicking domestic workers, who have nowhere else to go on their day off but the streets, gather on cardboard mats. They chatter, laugh and sing in an exhibition of delight in life rarely, if ever, seen among their wealthy employers. The domestic helpers in Hong Kong, predominantly Filipinas, typically live a physically demanding, restricted life, lavishing care on other people's children, while separated from their own. Hence the mystery: why are the least well off seemingly the happiest? Rina Jimenez-David unleashed a torrent of response when she pointed this out in the Philippine Daily Inquirer. She quoted Felipe de Leon, a professor at Manila's University of the Philippines, who claimed that there was no cross-cultural misunderstanding involved. Filipinos really do feel happier than Westerners or other Asians. They rank near the top in all the surveys. Malay Malaysians follow, while the Japanese and Hong Kong Chinese are the most miserable. Ms Jiminez-David said anecdotal evidence confirmed these findings. This is only partly true, according to the Erasmus University's perpetually updated World Database of Happiness. This source claims Filipinos consider themselves happier than do Indians and Chinese, but far less happy than Australians, New Zealanders, Americans or Britons. Hong Kong does not figure in this research. Time and again, hard evidence shows that the only outward behaviour that unequivocally signals unhappiness is attempted suicide. And even suicide attempts can be preceded by claims to happiness, which is why they often come as such a shock. According to happiness researcher Ruut Veenhoven, of the University of Utrecht in the Netherlands, attitudes are only loosely related to how we behave. Active, outgoing and friendly behaviour often does denote happiness, but not always. And plenty of happy people do not behave this way. Perhaps the Chinese are among them, as may be surmised from their inscrutable reputation noted by Michael Harris Bond in Beyond the Chinese Face. There are many occasions, writes Professor Bond, when culture-bound ego-defence and social desirability factors can cause very deceiving outward behaviour. Happiness is a state of mind. Commonly, the word is used for brief, euphoric highs as well as for long-term, relatively stable feelings of contentment. Is the Filipinas' Sunday party atmosphere indicative of their overall sense of happiness? Or is the bulk of their weekly experience harsh and lonely? Some might attribute the gaiety to the relief of being among one's own people, when the majority of life is spent tending to the needs of foreigners. There is also the powerful Robber's Cave principle, named after one of psychology's seminal experiments. It showed that the most authentic cohesion and pleasure one finds in a group comes from the feeling that the group members share a common dilemma, as the helpers do. This is borne out in real life. Many people look back on a period of difficulty, when they had to stick together in adversity, as the most meaningful and rewarding of their lives. This can be compared with the less heightened pleasure people derive from shared interests, social alliances or having a history in common. Considering their living conditions, one would suppose that Hong Kong's Filipina helpers mostly live an unhappy life, punctuated with bursts of delight in social gatherings, which inspire exuberance. But there is another key correlate with happiness the world over that may underlie this apparent joy: the personal sense of fulfilment to be had from helping others. Western studies have consistently shown that volunteering to help others is one of the most fundamental feel-good activities that exists. Measuring happiness is highly dubious in the first place, of course. Consider asking a Filipina helper if she is happy and asking a Chinese or expatriate executive the same question. Even assuming both have the same definition in mind, it would be rather naive to compare the responses without taking into account a multitude of factors. To take one example, the domestic helper might give you a seat-of-the-pants, overall, intuitive reply, while the other might engage in elaborate contemplation. This is important, as German Welfare Study researchers pointed out, because people who break life down into components in their heads, then make an overall judgment about their happiness, are able to simultaneously see room for improvement. The helper, on the other hand, may simply ask herself: how do I feel at the moment? How typical is this mood of how I feel most days? This less analytical approach may help explain why Filipinas are able to count their blessings and seem cheerful in conditions that are often harsh. Also, to some extent, the Hong Kong businessman would rate his happiness relative to other Hong Kong businessmen; helpers compare themselves to helpers. Life may be tough, but life back home is worse. Money does buy happiness, up to a point. Happiness and income are strongly correlated in poor countries, where unhappiness is the rule. But the link is weak in rich nations, where unhappiness is the exception. Another way psychologists look at happiness is as a flow of experiences. People born into a poor family in a corrupt country, lacking education and status and not exceptionally bright, beautiful or congenial, are more likely to meet with accidents, be cheated, exploited, humiliated and excluded and thus feel anxious, fearful, angry and lonely. Thus, happiness is a virtual impossibility for these people. Citizens of countries that are affluent, industrialised, urbanised and secure have the happiest people overall. But they are not without their complaints. Modernity brings a depressing sense of alienation and what could be called post-shopping malaise. Having satisfied all material needs, the rich look for happiness elsewhere. The 'positive psychology' movement is trying to find ways to address this problem. Instead of trying to fix problems, as most psychologists do, they try to enhance the positive. Its co-founder, former American Psychological Association president Martin Seligman, said they wanted to find better ways for people to find fulfilment than power, money, drugs or shopping. It has been long proven that choice is essential to a sense of well-being. But shades of meaning arise here too. The poor often suffer from having too few choices and they lack the support and knowledge to handle well the few they have. The rich typically have too many choices. They either ignore most of them or they research each thoroughly before choosing. The former alienate themselves to some extent. The latter, studies show, tend to agonise later over their decisions. It is as the wise have long known; happiness is a state of mind that comes from getting what you need and only partially from what you want. Jean Nicol is a Hong Kong-based psychologist and writer. She can be reached at everydaypsychologist@yahoo.com