Optimism, Pessimism, and Motivation: Relations to Adjustment

Social and Personality Psychology Compass 06/2009; 3(4):494 - 506. DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2009.00190.x

ABSTRACT The present work reviews the literature examining connections involving the key constructs of optimism and pessimism with motivation and adjustment. We review historical and conceptual models of optimism and pessimism. We then examine how these central constructs have been linked to both adaptive and maladaptive motivational processes and outcomes in the empirical literature. How cultural factors may impact the function of optimism and pessimism is also discussed. We end with a brief discussion of emerging issues that would be useful to examine in future research on optimism and pessimism.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: During the past few decades, the psychological trait of optimism has garnered an increasing amount of interest from scientists, and numerous studies have now shown that optimism is associated with important benefits. The present review summarizes the main findings from this body of research. We begin by describing the two main ways in which researchers have defined and operationalized optimism, as “optimistic explanatory style” and as “dispositional optimism”. Second, we provide an overview of the various studies documenting the benefits of optimism. Optimism indeed appears to be associated with higher levels of subjective well-being, better health, and more success. In addition, we describe some of the ongoing controversies in this area of research. Third, we summarize what researchers currently know about the causes of optimism, and how optimism can be fostered in adults as well as in youth. Finally, the present review highlights the adaptive nature of optimism, while recognizing that being optimistic under all circumstances may not always be best. Cultivating flexible and realistic optimism may therefore be most advantageous. We conclude by pointing out important areas of research for the future. These include continuing the search for the biological and brain substrates of optimism, and investigating the psychological and physiological benefits of adopting a flexible (as opposed to rigid) optimistic outlook on life.RésuméLe trait psychologique de l’optimisme a suscité un intérêt croissant auprès des chercheurs durant les dernières décennies. De nombreuses études ont montré que l’optimisme est associé à une grande variété de bénéfices. Cet article propose une revue des principaux résultats de cette littérature. Nous commençons par décrire les deux approches qui ont été utilisées afin de définir et opérationnaliser le construit de l’optimisme en tant que style explicatif ou en tant qu’optimisme dispositionnel. Puis, nous donnons un aperçu des différentes études documentant les conséquences de l’optimisme. Ces études suggèrent qu’être optimiste est associé au bonheur subjectif, à la santé, et au succès. En outre, nous décrivons certaines des controverses actuelles dans ce domaine de recherche. Nous résumons ensuite les connaissances scientifiques concernant les causes de l’optimisme, et comment il peut être favorisé chez les adultes ainsi que chez les jeunes. Enfin, cet article met en évidence le caractère adaptatif de l’optimisme, tout en soulignant les limites de l’optimisme en toutes circonstances, et la possibilité de cultiver un optimisme souple et réaliste. Nous concluons en soulignant quelques pistes de recherche importantes pour l’avenir comme l’étude des substrats biologiques et neurologiques de l’optimisme, et l’examen des bénéfices psychologiques et physiologiques de l’adoption d’un optimisme flexible plutôt que rigide.
    Pratiques Psychologiques 06/2012; 18(2):107–120. · 0.27 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Theories of bureaucratic reputation have been largely neglected despite major contributions from Carpenter and others, and despite novel empirical results. In the aggregate, and in sync with recent developments in social networks and social cognition, this paper offers a set of ideas for developing the study of bureaucratic reputation. It suggests that scholars of bureaucratic reputation have neglected research into two sets of relationships, the realization of which may turn this approach into a widely used theory. The first is the agency-audience relationships which revolve around how and what people think about public agencies, how these thoughts translate into agency behavior, and how information regarding this behavior is transformed within multiple agencies and how it impacts upon audience memory and behavior regarding that agency. The second is the relationships between agency heads and agency reputation. The paper provides a series of predictions on how systematic variation in both of these dimensions may bear on agency choices and on agency reputation.
    SSRN Electronic Journal 10/2014;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The present study investigated the relationship between perfectionism and depression, and the mediation/moderation effects of optimism. Participants were126 adults (78% women, mean age = 27 years) who completed an online survey that included the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (Frost, Marten, Lahart, & Rosenblate, 1990), the Revised Life Orientation Test (Scheier, Carver, & Bridges, 1994), and the Hamilton Depression Inventory (Reynolds & Kobak, 1995). Maladaptive, adaptive and total perfectionism were examined in separate analyses. In most analyses, the data fit a mediation model. Optimism limited the effect (relationship) of total and maladaptive perfectionism on depression. Adaptive perfectionism was related to depression only through optimism. There was a small gender difference, with indirect effects greater for men. These results are consistent with past research and support the notion that correlations between perfectionism, as a trait, and affective variables must be examined using multivariate models that allow for the determination of complex relationships.
    Personality and Individual Differences 02/2013; 54(3):426–431. · 1.86 Impact Factor


Available from