Examining
the Relationship Between Dispositional and Specific Expectation Optimism/Pessimism
and Their Effects on Task Performance
Maureen
P. Perry
Email:maperry@anselm.edu
Examining
the Relationship Between Dispositional and Specific Expectation Optimism/Pessimism
and Their Effects on Task Performance
Maureen
P. Perry
Email:maperry@anselm.edu
| Abstract | Introduction | Methods |
| Results | Implications | Relevant Links |
Keywords:
Optimism, Pessimism, Task Performance, Cognitive Styles
Within human nature there are two ways in which individuals think about the world. Individuals can be described as optimists or pessimists based on their cognitive styles of future events. Such thought styles can take place on two distinct levels. Dispositional optimism or pessimism encompasses a global view of whether the individual sees general future events as being positive or negative, respectively. Individuals also possess situation specific expectations that are either positive or negative. The purpose of this study was: 1) to examine the relationship between optimism and pessimism in regard to dispositional versus task specific expectation outlooks; 2) to examine how these outlooks effect performance on a specific task; 3) to determine who performed better on the task in general – optimists or pessimists; and 4) to determine the relationship between the individual’s predicted score and their actual score. 33 undergraduates at a small liberal arts college in the northeast participated in this study. Dispositional optimism and pessimism was measured by the Life Orientation Test, or (LOT), (Scheier & Carver, 1985). A modified version of this scale designed by the experimenter was implemented to measure optimism and pessimism on the specific expectation task dimension. Participants were also asked to predict their score on the test, ranging from 0 to 32. Finally, participants performed a specific task – a hidden figures spatial ability test from the Kit of Factor-Referenced Cognitive Tests (Ekstrom, French, Harman, & Dermen, 1976)- to measure task performance. Correlations between the dispositional and specific expectation optimism and pessimism were moderately to weakly correlated. This data was interpreted as supporting the notion that dispositional and specific expectations are different constructs and should be assessed separately. Consistent with prior research, participants’ predictions for future performance were found to be overly optimistic. However, this study failed to show which measure of optimism and pessimism- dispositional or specific- was a better predictor of task performance. Also no difference was found between optimists and pessimists on task performance. It is suggested that these results were compromised by the scales and tests administered in the study. Therefore, future research should use multiple measures of dispositional and specific optimism and pessimism that have proven validity and reliability. In addition task performance should be measured by a real-world task, such as a midterm test score.
Imagine this situation – you are sitting at your desk at work busily sifting through all the paperwork that needs to be reviewed by the end of the week when your boss unexpectantly calls you into his office. What is your first thought? Do you immediately get excited over the praise your boss is surely to award you for the spectacular contract you signed? Or are you anxious and nervous that you must have made some horrible mistake on the contract and now the boss is going to fire you?top
This example illustrates the two ways in which individuals think about the world around them. Individuals can be described as optimists or pessimists based on their different cognitive styles about future events. Seligman (1991), who has been studying these two basic kinds of people for the past 25 years, seems to have discovered their defining characteristics. He claims optimists believe defeat is not their fault: that circumstances, bad luck, or other people brought it about. These individuals are unfazed by defeat. Confronted by a bad situation, they perceive it as a challenge and try harder. On the other hand, pessimists tend to believe bad events will last a long time, will undermine everything they do, and are their own fault. Optimism and pessimism seem to be unavoidable kinds of judgments of the future, which we all display and act upon. These two opposing views about the world have been noticeably present in people for hundreds, even thousands of years and seem to be an integral part of human nature that psychologists are just beginning to understand.
Contemporary approaches usually treat optimism and pessimism as a cognitive characteristic – a goal, an expectation, or a causal attribution concerning future occurrences. Such cognitive processes can usually occur on two distinct levels. Individuals who have global expectations that good things will be plentiful in the future and bad things scarce are said to possess dispositional optimism. Those who have global expectations that bad things will be plentiful in the future and good things scarce are said to possess dispositional pessimism (Scheier & Carver, 1992). In addition, individuals also possess situation specific expectations for future life events that are categorized as either optimistic or pessimistic. Specific expectations are optimistic if they are positive while expectations that are pessimistic are negative.
Optimism and pessimism have been undergoing considerable research, especially in the past decade or so. According to a literature review by Peterson, (2000) research by a number of psychologists seems to have documented diverse benefits of optimism and constant drawbacks of pessimism. Optimism had been linked to positive mood and good moral, to perseverance and effective problem solving, to academic, athletic, military, occupational, and political success, to popularity, to good health; and even to long life and freedom from trauma. Pessimism, in contrast, seems to foreshadow depression, passivity, failure, social estrangement, morbidity, and mortality (Peterson, Seligman, & Vaillant, 1988; Scheier & Carver, 1987, 1992; Peterson, Maier & Seligman, 1993; Weinstein & Klein, 1996; Armor & Taylor, 1998). However, researchers are still quite uncertain about why this exactly is the case. In addition, these studies have focused on either dispositional optimism and pessimism or specific optimism and pessimism. Consequently, the relationship between the two is still largely unknown.
Most research has focused primarily on dispositional optimism or pessimism. The construct of dispositional optimism is argued to serve as an index for one’s typical or average outcome expectancies that (1) remains stable within a person over time, outcome domains, and performance situations, and (2) differs between persons as a meaniful aspect of personality. Scheier and Carver also believe this construct can be used “in much the same fashion as do outcome expectancies that are more specific in focus” (Scheier &Carver, 1988, p.331). In other words, generalized expectancies – particularly as measured by Scheier and Carver’s (1985) Life Orientation Test, or (LOT)- have been formulated to serve as a cross-situational alternative for more specific expectations.
Although the predictive value of Scheier and Carver’s generalized expectancy construct is well established, the belief of the conceptual status of generalized optimism and pessimism as an alternative for more specific expectations is less firmly grounded. The few studies comparing generalized outcome expectancies as measured by the LOT with measures of specific expectations have generally revealed weak or negligible associations between the two measures (Fitzgerald, Tennen, Affleck, & Pransky, 1993; Scheier et al., 1989; Taylor et al., 1992). Given the importance of one’s outlook and expectations in everyday life, it would seem profitable to gain a better understanding of how these two constructs relate. That is, how does one’s disposition to expect positive or negative outcomes relate to expectations and predictions a person has concerning the likelihood of a specific future event? One possibility is that dispositional and specific expectations represent the same basic construct. Alternatively, however, it may be that dispositional expectations and specific expectation are not closely related at all. Consequently, one measure would be a better predictor of future success on a task then the other. Ultimately, this study will help researchers better understand these constructs as well as their uses in life by answering this question.
The sample consisted of 33 undergraduates enrolled in an introductory psychology course at a small Catholic liberal arts college in the northeast.Participants were recruited from a sign-up sheet on the department bulletin board and received participation credit after the completion of the study. Subjects were given a dispositional optimism/pessimism scale. The Life Orientation Test, or LOT, was used to measure dispositional optimism versus pessimism. Then they were given a specific expectation optimism/pessimism scale, designed by the experimenter that was modified to the specific task they were to perform in the course of the study. These two measures were then correlated to determine if they measure the same construct. Participants were also asked to predict their score on the hidden figure test ranging from 0 to 32. Finally, participants were scored on the hidden figures task. The dependent measure being assessed was the number of problems answered correctly. This measure demonstrated an individual’s success on a task.
Means, standard deviations, and correlation coefficients were assessed for the LOT, the specific scale, the hidden figures test and the predicted scores. Results showed that the dispositional optimism/pessimism scale and the specific expectation scale were only moderately to weakly correlated r= .30. No significant correlations were found between either the dispositional or the specific expectation scale and the actual test score. In addition, the predicted test scores were generally overly optimistic. Actual test scores were found to be significantly lower then the predicted test score, t(31)=-10.43, p<.001. No significant difference of scores was found between optimists and pessimists.
Research to date on the topic of optimism and pessimism has helped establish a better understanding of these highly complex variables, however, understanding of the nature and effects of optimism and pessimism is still in its infancy, and there is so much more to learn (Scheier & Carver, 1993). It was found that the dispositional optimism/pessimism scale used, the LOT, and the specific expectation scale were only weakly to moderately correlated. This was consistent with past research that has found the LOT to have weak to negligible associations with measures of specific expectations (Fitzgerald et al., 1993; Fontaine. 1994; Scheier et al., 1992; & Taylor et al., 1992). Second, there was no significant relationship found between either optimism and pessimism scale and performance on the hidden figures test. This is not consistent with past research. Studies that have investigated the effects of both dispositional and specific optimism and pessimism have generally found that specific optimism is a better predictor of specific outcome then dispositional optimism or pessimism (Fitzgerald et al., 1993; Fontaine, 1994; Scheier et al., 1992; & Taylor et al., 1992). Third, no difference was found between optimists and pessimists on task performance. This is also inconsistent to past research that has shown that optimists outperform pessimists on a variety of task (Peterson 2000). Fourth, it was found that participants predicted scores were significantly higher then their actual scores on the test. Thus, they seemed to possess overly optimistic views on their task performance. This supports past literature that has found that people’s specific expectations tend to be quite optimistic, sometimes to an unrealistic degree (Weinstein, 1980; Taylor & Brown, 1988; Weinstein & Klein, 1996).
This study added to the literature contending that dispositional and specific optimism and pessimism should be considered separate constructs. Consequently, it has been advised that researchers assess both of these constructs when investigating the influence of expectations in various outcome variables. However, research to date does not show which construct –dispositional or specific- affects which outcome variable. Thus a profitable line of future research would be to determine when one of these two types of expectancies exerts a greater influence on various outcome variables.
Since some of the results failed to show significance when past research consistently has, a few changes need to be made to future research. First, it is suggested that two separate measures of dispositional optimism and pessimism are used, such as the LOT and the O/P scale. This would help researchers extend results to the construct in general not just to specific instruments. Secondly, the specific scale designed needs to be tested for validity and reliability before it is used again. Also, perhaps there is a better scale available that measures specific expectation optimism and pessimism. Finally, the measure of task performance needs to be altered. Although these results showed no significance, how an individual thinks about the world and the way they attribute their beliefs might have a profound significance on some of their behaviors – like how well they do in a class. However, these same beliefs might not have any significance on how they perceive or perform on a short cognitive test. Therefore, future research should focus on more real-world phenomenon, like a midterm test score, or overall performance in a class.
References
Peterson, Christopher. (2000). The Future of Optimism. American Psychologist, 55, 44-55.
Scheier, M. F, & Carver, C. S. (1985). Optimism, coping, and health:Assesssment and
implications of outcome expectancies. Health Psychology, 4, 219-247.Seligman, Martin. (1991). Learned Optimism. New York: Alfred Knopf.
Weinstein, N. D., & Klein, W. M. (1996). Unrealistic optimism: Present and future. Journal or
social and Clinical Psychology, 15, 1-8.
-Learn more on Martin Seligman's research on optimism and pessimism
-Take another Optimism/Pessimism personality test
-To increase your optimism check out these great poems
-American Psychological Association
Return to Psychology Department Homepage Return to Senior Thesis Homepage
