optimism, perceived control over stress, and coping

European Journal of Personality, Vol. 7,267-281 (1993)

Optimism, perceived control over stress, and coping

KEVIN R. FONTAINE University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK

ANTONY S. R. MANSTEAD University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands

and

HUGH WAGNER University of Manchester, UK

Abstract

To examine the ability of the expectancy-based personality dimensions dispositional optimism andperceived control over stress to predict the ways in which people characteristically attempt to cope with stress, 420 undergraduate students completed the Life Orientation Test (LOT; Scheier and Carver, 1985), a measure of perceived control over stress, and the dispositional version of the COPE Inventory (Carver, Scheier and Weintraub, 1989). The results revealed a modest but reliable positive correlation between optimism and the perceived control measure. Principal-components analysis of the COPE revealed a factor structure which was generally in accord with prior research. Optimism was positively correlated with active coping andpositive reinterpretation, and negatively correlated with focusing on and venting of emotion. Perceived control over stress was negatively correlated with behavioural disengagement. Impli- cations and directions for future research are discussed.

INTRODUCTION

Positive thinking has been long touted as a possible resource in helping people overcome personal hardship and adversity (cf. Cousins, 1976; Peale, 1956). Such an orientation or outlook on life is thought to promote and maintain well-being by

Portions of this research were presented at the Consortium of European Research on Emotion Conference, Paris, November 1991.

All correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Kevin Fontaine, Department of Psychology, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, PRl 2HE, UK.

0890-2070/93/040267-15$12.50 0 1993 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Received 18 March 1993 Accepted 4 July 1993

268 K. R. Fontaine, A. S. R. Manstead and H. Wagner

facilitating the conviction that obstacles can be successfully confronted and overcome. To help account for this possibility, Carver and Scheier (1981, 1982) have proposed an expectancy-based theory of behavioural self-regulation which contends that expectations of successful outcomes cause people to renew and sustain their efforts even in the face of obstacles or set-backs. In contrast, if people’s expectancies are suffi- ciently unfavourable, they will tend to reduce their efforts and disengage themselves from attaining their goals, especially in the face of impediments (Scheier and Carver, 1992; Scheier, Weintraub and Carver, 1986).

This proposal has been supported by a series of laboratory-based studies, the results of which suggested that variations in expectancy influence such actions as overcoming cold-pressor produced pain (Bandura, O’Leary, Taylor, Gauthier and Gossard, 1987) and coping effectively with fear of snakes (Carver, Blaney and Scheier, 1979) and with test anxiety (Carver, Peterson, Follansbee and Scheier, 1983). How- ever, these studies were limited largely to expectations that were situation- or even act-specific (e.g. approaching and touching a snake). Scheier and Carver (1985) have noted that given the fact that most day-to-day human concerns and activities are complex and multidetermined, it may be more useful to measure expectancies that are more general or global in nature. To this end, they coined the term dispositional optimism and developed the Life Orientation Test (LOT) to measure this generalized expectancy for good versus bad outcomes.

There is a developing literature attesting to the effects of optimism on both psychological well-being (Aspinwall and Taylor, 1992; Carver and Gaines, 1987; Scheier and Carver, 1985, 1992) and physical well-being (Hamid, 1990; Scheier and Carver, 1987; Scheier, Matthews, Owens, Magovern, Lefebvre, Abbott and Carver, 1989; Taylor, Kemeny, Aspinwall, Schneider, Rodriguez and Hebert, 1992). Moreover, recent research findings suggest that coping may be one of the possible pathways by which individual differences in optimism lead to the production of adaptive outcomes. That is, evidence from a number of sources (e.g. Scheier et al., 1986, 1989) shows that optimists and pessimists can be distinguished in terms of coping tactics that they employ when under stress. More specifically, optimism correlates positively with problem-focused coping, including cognitive coping strategies which focus on the positive aspects of stress-engendering encounters. Optimism also tends to corre- late negatively with coping efforts which are characterized by distancing oneself from the situation and/or pre-occupation with the distressing emotions that are associated with the stress experience. Such findings have been obtained both in college samples (e.g. Carver et al., 1989; Scheier et al., 1986) and in samples that were severely stressed (e.g. heart bypass surgery patients, Scheier et al., 1989; men at risk of developing AIDS, Taylor et al., 1992).

Although the research literature is therefore consistent with the notion that optimists and pessimists differ in the ways that they attempt to cope with specific stressful situations, relatively little attention has been given to the possibility that differences in optimism versus pessimism actually dispose individuals to use certain sets of strategies irrespective of the particular type of stressor being confronted (cf. Carver et al., 1989).

A major difficulty in conducting such research lies in measuring the ways that people characteristically cope with stress. Obtaining multiple assessments of people’s coping behaviours over a number of stressful episodes would be the ideal way of determining the extent to which people use a preferred set of strategies. However,

Optimism, perceived control, and coping 269

such an approach has rarely been undertaken, no doubt because it is costly and difficult to implement effectively (Lazarus, 1991).

A viable alternative is to ask participants to respond by completing a coping questionnaire in reference to how they usually attempt to cope with stress. That is, they are asked to indicate their coping preferences directly by being instructed to respond globally rather than in relation to a particular stressful encounter. In this way, it becomes possible to examine whether optimism relates to the types of coping strategies that people typically use when under stress. Another important issue concerns the distinctiveness of the optimism construct relative to other personality dimensions. That is, it has recently been suggested that optimism (as measured by the LOT) is not as distinct from other constructs as has been assumed. Indeed, some have argued that results which have been attributed to optimism may be more parsimoniously explained as reflecting other related personality dimensions, most notably neuroticism (Smith, Pope, Rhodewalt and Poulton, 1986), self-mastery (Mar- shall and Lang, 1990), or perceived control. To this end, the present study assessed the predictive utility of the LOT relative to a measure designed to assess people’s perceived control over stress. That is, subjects were asked to rate the extent to which they generally expect to be able to control the stressful situations in their lives. This measure is operationally defined as the enduring expectancy that one has at one’s disposal a response or set of responses that can reduce or eliminate the stressful- ness of events (Litt, 1988). In essence, it can be thought of as an attributionally-based expectancy for positive outcomes that is predicated upon one’s conviction that one can exercise control over the relevant aspects of the situation.

To summarize, the specific goals of the study are (1) to determine the degree of association between optimism and perceived control over stress; (2) to generate a factor structure for the COPE Inventory on a predominately British sample; and ( 3 ) to determine the zero-order and partial associations between these personality measures and coping. Consistent with prior research, it was predicted that the two personality measures would be positively associated. It was also hypothesized that optimism would be positively associated with the use of coping strategies which are action-oriented, whereas pessimism would be correlated with the propensity to use strategies that are characterized by attempts to withdraw or to dwell on the emotions arising during the encounter. A similar pattern of findings is expected with respect to the associations between perceived control and coping.

METHOD

Subjects and procedure

Subjects were 173 male and 247 female undergraduate students at the University of Manchester, England. The males varied in age from 18 to 34 years ( M = 20 years); the females ranged from 18 to 45 years ( M = 20.5 years). Two hundred and sixteen were volunteers who participated as part of a lecture on stress and coping (the didactic lecture material was presented only after the data had been collected). One hundred and forty-three were volunteers who agreed to participate in return for eligibility in a lottery for a cash prize. The remaining sixty-one were first-year psychology students who participated in partial fulfilment of a course requirement.

270 K. R. Fontaine, A. S. R. Manstead and H. Wagner

Subjects were simply told that the purpose of the study was to examine how people attempt to cope with stress in their lives. The questionnaire packet containing the assessment inventories was then distributed to the subjects. Two hundred and sixteen of the subjects completed the questionnaires in large group sessions, while the remaining 204 completed and returned the questionnaires within 1 week of its distribution.

Psychological measures

The questionnaire packet contained three self-administered assessment instruments (in counter-balanced orders): the Life Orientation Test (LOT; Scheier and Carver, 1985), a Perceived Control over Stress measure, and the dispositional version of the COPE Inventory (Carver et al., 1989).

Optimism-pessimism

The personality disposition of optimism versus pessimism was assessed by the LOT. This is an 8-item (plus four filler items) self-report scale consisting of four items phrased in a positive way (e.g. ‘In uncertain times, I expect the best’) and four phrased in a negative way (e.g. ‘If something can go wrong for me it will’). Response choices for the positively-framed items ranged from 1 (‘I strongly disagree’) to 5 (‘I strongly agree’), as opposed to the 0 to 4 response range originally used by Scheier and Carver (1985). Negatively-framed items were reversed prior to scoring the test. Scheier and Carver (1985) reported a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.76 and a test-retest reliability of 0.79 (over a 4-week interval) for a college sample. Alpha reliability in the present sample of undergraduates was 0.78.

Perceived control over stress

The extent to which subjects characteristically perceive that they have control over the stressful circumstances in their lives was assessed by a single item measure that was included directly after the LOT. Subjects were asked to indicate which response best applied for them in relation to the statement ‘When I am under stress, I usually expect that . . .’. Subjects answered on a 4-point scale with responses ranging from 1 (‘I can do nothing about the situation’) to 4 (‘I can control the situation’).

Coping preferences

Coping preferences were assessed by the dispositional version of the COPE Inventory (Carver et al., 1989). The COPE is a 60-item self-report questionnaire designed to assess the various cognitive and behavioural strategies that people may use to manage stress. Coping preferences were assessed by asking subjects to complete the inventory with reference to how they usually attempt to cope with stress in their lives. Response choices were from 1 (‘I usually don’t do this at all’) to 4 (‘I usually do this a lot’).

Carver et al. (1989) submitted the COPE to a principal-factors factor analysis with oblique rotation which yielded 13 scales: Active Coping, Planning, Suppression of Competing Activities, Restraint Coping, Seeking Social Support for Instrumental Reasons, Seeking Social Support for Emotional Reasons, Positive Reinterpretation and Growth, Acceptance, Turning to Religion, Focus On and Venting of Emotions,


Denial, Behavioural Disengagement, Mental Disengagement, and a single-item Drug and Alcohol Disengagement scale.

Although the two Social Support scales loaded together on a single factor, Carver et al. opted to separate them to emphasize the theoretical distinction between seeking support for advice or for emotional reasons. In a similar vein, the Active Coping and Planning scales also loaded on a single factor but were separated to amplify the theoretical distinction between planning and actually executing activity-based coping efforts. In addition, since the scale’s publication three items have been added to the Alcohol and Drugs scale, and an additional 4-item Humour scale (e.g. ‘I laugh about the situation’, ‘I kid around about it’) has also been added to the COPE (Carver, personal communication, October 1990). These additional items were all included in the version of the COPE used in the present study.

RESULTS

Associations between optimism and perceived control over stress

Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations of the LOT and perceived control over stress (PC) measures for the entire sample as well as a breakdown by gender. It is apparent from inspection of these summary statistics that the scores of men and women were virtually identical on both measures. To confirm this, independent t-tests were computed on the LOT [t(418) = 1.22, p = 0.224, two-tailed], and PC measure [t(418) = 0.02, p = 0.984, two-tailed]. Bearing in mind the fact that in the present study we used a 1 to 5 as opposed to a 0 to 4 response range (as have others, e.g. Aspinwall and Taylor, 1992; Marshall, Wortman, Kusulas, Hervig and Vickers, 1992; Taylor et al., 1992), the distribution of LOT scores in this sample tended toward the optimistic, which is comparable to other college samples (cf. Scheier and Carver, 1985; Scheier et al., 1986).

Table 1. Means and standard deviations of the LOT and PC measures

LOT PC

M SD M SD

Overall ( N = 420) 27.69 5.85 2.85 0.63 Men ( N = 173) 27.27 6.06 2.85 0.69 Women ( N = 247) 27.98 5.69 2.85 0.58

Note: LOT = Life Orientation Test (Scheier and Carver, 1985); PC =Perceived Control over stress.

Three Pearson product-moment correlations were computed (overall and by gender) to determine the degree of association between the LOT and PC measures. As anticipated, a significant positive association was found in all three instances: overall, r(418) = 0.39, p < 0.01; men, r(171) = 0.44, p < 0.01; women, r(245) = 0.34, p < 0.01, two-tailed. There proved to be no significant gender differences in the strength of association between the LOT and PC measures, z = 1.13 .

272 K. R. Fontaine, A . S. R. Manstead and H. Wagner

Data reduction: the COPE inventory

Initially, the 60 items of the COPE were submitted to both principal-axis and principal-components analysis. Because the two analyses yielded essentially identical findings, only the results of the principal-components analysis (PCA) will be presented.

Principal-axis and principal-components extraction were first used to estimate the number of factorskomponents and the factorability of the correlation matrix. Fifteen components were extracted with eigenvalues greater than 1, accounting for 64.4 per cent of the variance. Oblique rotation was then used to improve the interpretabi- lity of the solution and to examine the correlations among the components. The matrix of correlations generated from the oblique rotation did not yield any statistical associations at or above 0.30. Tabachnick and Fidell (1989) have noted that in the absence of at least a few correlations of 0.30 (roughly a 10 per cent overlap in variance), there is not sufficient empirical justification to warrant the use of oblique rotation. Given this, orthogonal (Varimax) rotation was used in the present analysis.

The final PCA yielded 15 components with eigenvalues greater than I , 14 of which were readily interpretable, accounting for 62.7 per cent of the total variance. Three of the items-‘I turn to work or other substitute activities to take my mind off things’, ‘I act as though it hasn’t happened’, and ‘I sleep more than usual’-failed to load on any of the components at 0.40 and were therefore omitted from the analysis. The remaining 57 items loaded predominantly on only one of the components (see Table 2).

The component structure derived here is in close accord with the scales generated by Carver et al. (1989), with a few notable exceptions. First, unlike Carver et al., we opted not to divide the social support components on the basis of whether one seeks support for emotional or instrumental reasons. Apart from the absence of any empirical justification for doing so, it is likely that in practice they will co-occur when a person uses such support. Hence, separating them may create an artificial distinction that does not exist in practice. The same can be said of the Active Coping and Planning scales (referred to here simply as Active Coping), which also loaded on a single factor in both analyses. Another deviation from the Carver et al. factor structure was that in the present analysis the positive reinterpretation and growth items loaded as separate components (each with two items). This may reflect the fact that there is a distinction between deriving meaning from an experience to facilitate personal growth and simply viewing an event in a more positive way as a means of dealing with the specific stress-engendering episode. Overall, however, the similari- ties between the two solutions suggest that there is a stable structure underlying the COPE.

Information concerning the internal consistency of the 14 COPE scales comes from Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients, which were computed for each scale (see Table 2). On the whole, these values are highly acceptable, with only the two-item Mental Disengagement scale falling below 0.6. These reliabilities are comparable to those reported in Carver et al. (1989).

Zero-order correlations between optimism, perceived control over stress, and coping

To assess the bivariate relationships between dispositional optimism and the 14 COPE component scales that emerged from the PCA, component scores were generated


for each subject and correlated with their LOT scores.' Table 3 displays these correlations for the entire sample as well as a breakdown by gender. As can be seen from the first column of Table 3, optimism proved to be correlated significantly with six of the 14 COPE scales. As predicted, optimism was positively correlated with the use of active coping, positive reinterpretation, and growth. Also as hypothesized, optimism was inversely associated with the use of focusing on and venting of emotion, behavioural disengagement, and denial.

In relation to gender differences (see columns 2 and 3 of Table 3), the significant positive associations between optimism and growth and positive reinterpretation were not present in men. However, there proved to be no statistically reliable differences between the sexes with respect to the strength of the associations between optimism and the various COPE scales.

The zero-order correlations between the Perceived Control over Stress measure and the 14 COPE scales are presented in Table 4. Perceived control over stress proved to be correlated significantly with five of the COPE scales. Specifically, it was positively associated with the use of active coping and growth, and inversely associated with behavioural disengagement, denial, and focusing on and venting of emotion. There proved to be no significant gender differences with respect to the associations between perceived control and coping.

Optimism and perceived control: their independent associations with coping

The independent associations between optimism, perceived control, and the COPE scales were determined by computing partial correlation coefficients (see Table 5).

With the effects of perceived control partialled out, optimism proved to be positively correlated with the use of active coping and positive reinterpretation, and inversely correlated with focusing on and venting of emotion. The partial correlations between perceived control and coping controlling for optimism showed that perceived control was inversely associated with the use of behavioural disengagement.

DISCUSSION

Optimism and perceived control over stress

As predicted, dispositional optimism and perceived control over stress were modera- tely but significantly correlated. It seems clear, then, that these two constructs overlap to some extent. This finding is not surprising since implicit within Scheier and Carver's (1985, 1992) expectancy-based theory, upon which the optimism construct is based, is the notion that many people presumably develop or derive their expectancies from a string of successful outcomes in which personal control undoubtedly played a fundamental role. Hence, perceived control would be hypothesized as a significant contributory component of the optimism construct. This is perhaps especially so

' Marshall et al. (1992) have recently suggested that the positively- and negatively-framed LOT items may measure related but distinct psychological dimensions. To assess this possibility, additional analyses were performed which correlated separately the two item sets with coping preferences. On the whole, the differences were neither large nor very systematic. Because of this, the results reported here treated the LOT as a unitary scale. Nevertheless, the question ofwhether the LOT is a unitary or multidimensional scale clearly merits further direct investigation.

214

Table 2.

K. R. Fontaine, A . S. R. Manstead and H. Wagner

COPE scales: items listed with loadings to which each item pertains

Scale name and items

Social Support (8 items, a = 0.90) I talk to someone about how I feel I discuss my feelings with someone I try to get emotional support from friends or relatives I get sympathy and understanding from someone I try to get advice from someone about what to do I ask people who have had a similar experience what they did I talk to someone who could do something concrete about the problem I talk to someone to find out more about the situation

Active Coping (8 items, a = 0.83) I make a plan of action I try to come up with a strategy about what to do I take additional action to get rid of the problem I take direct action to get around the problem I concentrate my efforts on doing something about it I do what has to be done, one step at a time I think hard about what steps to take I think about how I might handle the problem

Alcohol/Drug Use (4 items, a = 0.92) I drink alcohol or take drugs, in order to think about it less I try to lose myself for a while by drinking or taking drugs I use alcohol or drugs to make myself feel better I use alcohol or drugs to get me through

Turning to Religion (4 items, a = 0.91) I seek God’s help I put my trust in God I try to find comfort in my religion I pray more than usual

Humour (4 items, a = 0.89) 1 make fun of the situation I make jokes about it I kid around about it I laugh about the situation

Denial (3 items, a = 0.71) I pretend that it really hasn’t happened I refuse to believe that it has happened I say to myself ‘this isn’t real’

Loading

0.86 0.80 0.80 0.79 0.74 0.73 0.68 0.63

0.73 0.70 0.68 0.65 0.58 0.56 0.55 0.45

0.90 0.90 0.90 0.86

0.90 0.88 0.86 0.85

0.89 0.88 0.87 0.76

0.75 0.73 0.67

Behavioural Disengagement (4 items, a = 0.67) I give up the attempt to get what I want I just give up trying to reach my goal I admit to myself that I can’t deal with it and quit trying I reduce the amount of effort I’m putting into solving the problem

0.76 0.75 0.53 0.53


Table 2. (continued)

Scale name and items Loading

Restraint Coping (4 items, a = 0.66) I make sure not to make matters worse by acting too soon I force myself to wait for the right time to do something I restrain myself from doing anything too quickly I hold off doing anything until the situation permits

Focusing On and Venting of Emotion (4 items, a = 0.79) I feel a lot of emotional distress and find myself expressing those feelings a lot I get upset and am really aware of it I get upset and let those feelings out I let my feelings out

Suppress Competing Acts (4 items, a = 0.64) I put aside other activities in order to concentrate on this I focus on dealing with this problem and if necessary let other things slide a little I try hard to prevent other things from interfering with my efforts to deal with this I keep myself from getting distracted by other thoughts or activities

Acceptance (4 items, a = 0.62) I accept that this has happened and that it cannot be changed I learn to live with it I get used to the idea that it happened I accept the reality of the fact that it happened

Growth (2 items, a = 0.68) I try to grow as a person as a result of the experience I learn something from the experience

Positive Reinterpretation (2 items, a = 0.73) I try to see it in a different light, to make it seem more positive I look for something good in what is happening

Mental Disengagement (2 items, a = 0.39) I eo to the movies or watch TV to think about it less I iaydream about things other than this

Note: Items are listed in order of strength of loading.

0.73 0.72 0.66 0.50

0.74 0.70 0.63 0.53

0.17

0.67

0.55 0.46

0.72 0.64 0.58 0.44

0.79 0.79

0.75 0.60

0.69 0.63


Table 3. Zero-order correlations between optimism and coping

COPE scale Overall ( N = 420) Men ( N = 173) Women ( N = 247)

Social Support Active Coping AlcohoUDrugs Turning to Religion Humour Denial Behavioural Disengagement Restraint Coping FocusNent Emotion Suppress Other Acts Acceptance Growth Positive Reinterpretation Mental Disengagement

0.01 0.23**

-0.05 0.08 0.08

-0.14** -0.19**

0.02 -0.20**

0.00 0.10* 0.13** 0.17** 0.00

0.04 0.22** 0.00 0.09 0.08

-0.15* -0.15*

-0.15* -0.07

0.14 0.10 0.14 0.00

0.09

-0.06 0.23**

-0.08 0.07 0.10

-0.14* -0.22** -0.03 -0.26**

0.06 0.07 0.15* 0.18** 0.00

Note: Because the sample size afforded us the statistical power to detect fairly trivial effects, significance levels of p < 0.05 did not meet our adopted criteria (for overall correlations, df = 418; for men, df = 171; for women, df = 245). *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01, two-tailed.

Table 4. Zero-order correlations between perceived control over stress and coping

COPE scale Overall ( N = 420) Men ( N = 173) Women ( N = 247)

Social Support -0.07 -0.01 -0.14*

Alcohol/Drugs -0.05 -0.04 -0.07 Turning to Religion 0.06 0.00 0.11 Humour -0.03 -0.03 -0.02 Denial -0.16** -0.21** -0.12* Behavioural Disengagement -0.22** -0.31** -0.14* Restraint Coping 0.04 0.10 0.00 FocusNent Emotion -0.13** -0.10 -0.17** Suppress Competing Acts 0.03 0.00 -0.06 Acceptance 0.09 0.1 1 0.07 Growth 0.15** 0.07 0.22** Positive Reinterpretation 0.07 0.08 0.06 Mental Disengagement -0.07 -0.08 -0.06

Note: Significance levels of p < 0.05 did not meet our adopted criteria (degrees of freedom as stated in Table 3). *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01, two-tailed.

Active Coping 0.17** 0.16* 0.17**

within stressful contexts where the perception of personal control may take on added significance since effective coping is thought to involve an accurate match between demands and resources (cf. Folkman, 1984; Lazarus and Folkman, 1984). However, the relatively weak association between the two measures indicates that there is at least some empirical justification for believing that the LOT is not simply another measure of perceived control. This finding is also consistent with Scheier and Carver’s (1985, 1987) contention that there may be many people who are optimistic yet do not expect or believe that they have control over many of the relevant outcomes in their lives. If this is so, then it may be that the non-overlapping portion of perceived


Table 5. stress, and couing ( N = 420)

Partial correlations between optimism, perceived control over

COPE scale Optimism Perceived control

Social Support Active Coping Alcohol/Drugs Turning to Religion Humour Denial Behavioural Disengagement Restraint Coping FocusNent Emotion Suppress Competing Acts Acceptance Growth Positive Reinterpretation Mental Disengagement

0.04 0.17**

-0.03 0.06 0.10

-0.08 -0.11*

0.00 -0.16** -0.01

0.06 0.07 0.15** 0.03

-0.08 0.09

-0.04 0.03

-0.07 -0.12* -0.16**

0.04 -0.06

0.03 0.06 0.11* 0.00

-0.08

Note: Significance levels ofp < 0.05 did not meet our adopted criteria. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01, two-tailed, df= 417.

control over stress and optimism reflects differences in causal attributions regarding outcomes. That is, for perceived control over stress, the unique component may refer to the attribution that one has the resources or ability to manage stress. In contrast, the unique component of optimism may refer to generalized expectancies for positive outcomes that are not attributable to control expectancies. In any event, within the confines of this study, dispositional optimism appears not to be a comple- tely redundant construct, at least with respect to this context-specific perceived control measure.

Associations between optimism and coping

Overall, the pattern of associations between the LOT and the 14 COPE scales was consistent with predictions. Specifically, optimism was positively associated with the use of active coping, growth, and positive reinterpretation. It also proved to be negatively correlated with the use of denial, behavioural disengagement, and focusing on and venting of emotion. Perhaps more importantly, with the influence of perceived control over stress partialled out, optimism maintained its positive association with the use of both active coping and positive reinterpretation. Optimism also remained negatively correlated with focusing on and venting of emotion.

These results are generally consistent with those of Scheier et al. (1986, Studies 1 and 2), who also found optimism to be associated positively with problem-focused coping (i.e. active coping), and emphasizing the positive; and inversely associated with the use of strategies that attempt to deny or distance oneself from the stressor. The main difference between the present results and those of Scheier et al. (1986) is that in the present study optimism was not positively associated with the use of social support. However, in this regard, it is worth noting that the subjects in the Scheier et al. studies completed their coping questionnaires in reference to a specific stressful encounter. It is possible that the difference between these studies in relation to the association between optimism and social support may be a function


of the fact that such support is context-dependent; that is, it is contingent upon having interpersonal resources at one’s disposal. The present findings suggest that, in the absence of a specific context to refer to, optimism is not correlated with the use of social support.

Carver et al. (1989) examined the relationship between optimism and coping preferences (also assessed by the COPE) and found a pattern of associations similar to that observed in the present study, although in their study optimism correlated with 12 of their 14 coping scales. The present study represents a conceptual replication and extension of the Carver et al. (1989) study in that the influence of a potential confounding or third variable was controlled in an effort to determine the impact of optimism on coping. The present findings suggest that optimism may have a reliable association (independent of perceived control over stress) with at least some of the coping strategies that people usually use when confronted by stress. In short, optimists appear to characteristically use strategies that are active in scope and are less likely to withdraw or become preoccupied with distressing emotions. This is consistent with the theoretically-based notion that because optimists expect good rather than bad outcomes, they tend to engage in active coping efforts and sustain those efforts even in the face of obstacles or impediments (Scheier and Carver, 1987, 1992).

Limitations of the present study

This study has some important limitations. First and foremost, the fact that the associations were concurrent precludes any definitive statements regarding the causal significance of either optimism or perceived control over stress on coping. Though the pattern of associations is consistent with prior work suggesting that optimism may be a determinant of the strategies that people use to cope with stress, it is equally plausible that certain forms of coping influence or even determine one’s level of optimism or perceived control. Prospective designs are obviously needed in order to reduce this causal ambiguity.

A second limitation is that perceived control over stress was assessed by only a single item index with uncertain reliability and validity. More specifically, the possibility exists that the single item control measure may contain more measurement error than does the measure of optimism. However, it seems reasonable to suggest that it may not be a problem in this instance, particularly since the one item appears to capture the essence of the concept in question. It is interesting to note also that the association between dispositional optimism and the single item control measure in the present study was comparable to correlations between the LOT and Rotter’s ( 1 966) Internal-External Locus of Control Scale documented in previous research (Aspinwall and Taylor, 1992; Carver et al., 1989; Scheier and Carver, 1985). Nonethe- less, a multi-item control measure would have afforded us the opportunity to provide a more direct assessment of the scale’s psychometric properties as well as to assess the dimensionality of the optimism and control constructs in a more rigorous fashion.

A third limitation is that the coping data were collected by self-report. Hence the results are not immune to the potential confounding in having subjects retrospecti- vely recall the ways that they cope with stress. This is perhaps especially so in this instance since subjects were requested to provide us with the ways that they usually cope with stress. That is, their task was to provide an aggregate or subjective calculus


of their coping across a wide variety of encounters. Obviously it is unclear how subjects go about such a task or, indeed, whether their responses do in fact represent a synthesis of their coping tactics rather than merely a reflection of their coping in reference to a recent stressful encounter. In this regard, however, it is worth noting that a sub-sample of 60 subjects were given two administrations of the episode- specific version of the COPE, in which they were asked to indicate which strategies they actually used to cope with stressful incidents that they self-selected. The results showed that coping preferences and episode-specific coping responses were dis- tinguishable. This suggests that the instructions given prior to completing the two versions of the COPE were effective manipulations. That is, our efforts to assess coping dispositionally appear to have assessed something other than simply the coping employed during a specific incident.

Conclusions and future directions

In the present study we have found evidence suggesting that optimism is positively associated with the use of strategies designed to intervene directly in an effort to ameliorate the source of stress, and inversely linked to coping activities which dwell on the negative emotions generated during stressful encounters. Moreover, both sets of associations were independent of the influence of the covariate perceived control over stress. It is worth bearing in mind, however, that most of the correlations were below 0.20. This means that the effect sizes were generally small (cf. Cohen, 1988) and hence the major portion of variance in coping remains unexplained. Of course, the small correlations of optimism and coping could also reflect the influence of third variables other than perceived control over stress. Indeed, as we have noted, some have argued strongly that the predictive utility of optimism is due to its substan- tial overlap with the construct of neuroticism or negative affectivity (Smith et al., 1986). Nonetheless, the present results do suggest that optimism is a factor reliably associated with the use of certain forms of coping (see Scheier and Carver, 1992, for an extended discussion of the issue of variable overlap).

It seems clear, however, that in order to gain a further understanding of the impact that an optimistic orientation toward life has on coping, or, for that matter, well- being, it is important to enlist more complex research designs which attempt to disentangle the predictive overlap of a number of related personality dimensions (e.g. optimism, self-esteem, neuroticism, self-mastery). Moreover, research of this kind will also facilitate an evaluation of dispositional optimism in the context of higher-order personality domains (i.e. the Big Five) and thereby help to eliminate the utilization of ‘redundant’ personality variables.

In addition, more concerted efforts should be made to determine the relationship between dispositional optimism and those expectancies which emerge during specific stressful episodes (cf. Bandura, 1986; Taylor et al., 1992). That is, although optimism is thought to be a stable style or propensity to view the world and one’s relationship to it in such a way that the person expects ‘things to work out’, for purposes of adaptation it also needs to be quite flexible and modifiable in the sense that it must be influenced or even overridden by event-driven expectancies which may indicate to the person that the situation is not likely to turn out favourably. We suggest, therefore, that future research should also attempt to identify the impact that an optimistic style of relating to the world has upon those expectancies which arise


in situ. Research of this kind may make it possible to delineate some additional pathways by which optimism has an impact on the stress process.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We wish to thank Adrian Furnham and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper.

REFERENCES

Aspinwall, L. G. and Taylor, S. E. (1992). ‘Modeling cognitive adaptation: a longitudinal investigation of the impact of individual differences and coping on college adjustment and performance’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63: 989-1003.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Bandura, A., O’Leary, A., Taylor, C., Gauthier, J. and Gossard, D. (1987). ‘Perceived self- efficacy and pain control: opiod and non-opiod mechanisms’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53: 563-571.

Carver, C. S., Blaney, P. H. and Scheier, M. F. (1979). ‘Focus of attention, chronic expectancy, and responses to a feared stimulus’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37: 1 186- 1195.

Carver, C . S. and Gaines, J. G. (1987). ‘Optimism, pessimism, and post-partum depression’, Cognitive Therapy and Research, 11: 449462.

Carver, C. S., Peterson, L. M., Follansbee, D. J. and Scheier, M. F. (1983). ‘Effects of self- directed attention on performance and persistence among persons high and low in test anxiety’, Cognitive Therapy and Research, 7 : 333-354.

Carver, C. S. and Scheier, M. F. (1981). Attention and Self-Regulation: A Control Theory Approach to Human Behavior, Springer-Verlag, New York.

Carver, C. S. and Scheier, M. F. (1982). ‘Control theory: a useful conceptual framework for personality-social, clinical, and health psychology’, Psychological Bulletin, 92: 11 1-1 35.

Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F. and Weintraub, J. K. (1989). ‘Assessing coping strategies: a theoretically based approach’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56: 267-283.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edn, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.

Cousins, N. (1976). ‘Anatomy of an illness (as perceived by the patient)’, New England Journal of Medicine, 295: 1458-1463.

Folkman, S. (1984). ‘Personal control and stress and coping processes: a theoretical analysis’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46: 839-852.

Hamid, N. P. (1990). ‘Optimism and the reporting of flu symptoms’, Social Behavior and Personality, 18: 225-234.

Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and Adaptation, Oxford University Press, New York. Lazarus, R. S. and Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, Appraisal, and Coping, Springer-Verlag, New

York. Litt, M. D. (1988). ‘Cognitive mediators of stressful experiences: self-efficacy and perceived

control’, Cognitive Therapy and Research, 12: 241-260. Marshall, G. N. and Lang, E. (1990). ‘Optimism, self-mastery, and symptoms of depression

in women professionals’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59: 132-1 39. Marshall, G. N., Wortman, C. B., Kusulas, J. W., Hervig, L. K. and Vickers, R. R. (1992).

‘Distinguishing optimism from pessimism: relations to fundamental dimensions of mood and personality’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62: 1067-1 074.

Peale, N. V. (1956). The Power of Positive Thinking, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Rotter, J. B. (1966). ‘Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforce-

ment’, Psychological Monographs, 80 (1, Whole No. 609).


Scheier, M. F. and Carver, C. S. (1985). ‘Optimism, coping, and health: assessment and impli- cations of generalized outcome expectancies’, Health Psychology, 4: 219-247.

Scheier, M. F. and Carver, C. S. (1987). ‘Dispositional optimism and physical well-being: the effects of generalized outcome expectancies on health’, Journal of Personality, 55: 169- 210.

Scheier, M. F. and Carver, C. S. (1992). ‘Effects of optimism on psychological and physical well-being: theoretical overview and empirical update’, Cognitive Therapy and Research,

Scheier, M. F., Matthews, K. A,, Owens, J. F., Magovern, G. J., Lefebvre, R. C., Abbott, R. A. and Carver, C. S. (1989). ‘Dispositional optimism and recovery from coronary bypass surgery: the beneficial effects on physical and psychological well-being’, Journal of Persona- lity and Social Psychology, 57: 1024-1040.

Scheier, M. F., Weintraub, J. K. and Carver, C. S. (1986). ‘Coping with stress: divergent

16: 201-228.

strategies of optimists and pessimists’, Journal of Personality &d-Social Psychology,- 51: 1257-1 264.

Smith, T., Pope, M., Rhodewalt, F. and Poulton, J. (1986). ‘Optimism, neuroticism, coping, and symptom reports: an alternative explanation of the Life Orientation Test’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56: 640448.

Tabachnick, B. G. and Fidell, L. S. (1989). Using Multivariate Statistics, 2nd edn, Harper and Row, New York.

Taylor, S. E., Kemeny, M. E., Aspinwall, L. G., Schneider, S. G., Rodriguez, R. and Hebert, M. (1 992). ‘Optimism, coping, psychological distress, and high-risk sexual behavior among men at risk for AIDS’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63: 460-473.

optimism, perceived control over stress, and coping

Documents