Other formats:
BibTeX
LaTeX
RIS
@inproceedings{1362162,
author = {Dosedlová, Jaroslava and Jelínek, Martin and Klimusová, Helena and Burešová, Iva},
address = {Amsterdam},
booktitle = {The European Proceedings of Social & Behavioural Sciences},
doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2016.11.45},
editor = {Bekirogullari, Zafer; Minas, Melis Y.; Thambusamy, Roslind X.},
keywords = {optimism; pessimism; hope; models},
howpublished = {elektronická verze "online"},
language = {eng},
location = {Amsterdam},
pages = {436-447},
publisher = {Future Academy},
title = {Positive Expectations – Optimism and Hope in Models},
year = {2016}
}
TY - JOUR
ID - 1362162
AU - Dosedlová, Jaroslava - Jelínek, Martin - Klimusová, Helena - Burešová, Iva
PY - 2016
TI - Positive Expectations – Optimism and Hope in Models
PB - Future Academy
CY - Amsterdam
KW - optimism
KW - pessimism
KW - hope
KW - models
N2 - Current approaches to optimism accentuate its many different aspects: dispositional optimism (Scheier, & Carver, 2002), defensive pessimism (Norem, & Cantor, 1989), unrealistic optimism (Weinstein, 1980) and hope (Snyder, 1994). The aims of the research (supported by GACR, no. 13-19808S) were to design a model of optimism/pessimism using the dimensions of dispositional optimism, defensive pessimism, unrealistic optimism and hope, and to determine the degree of conceptual overlap between optimism and hope. We collected data from 1,774 respondents (men 33.3%, women 66.7 %) at the age from 15 to 79 (m 33.5, SD 15.8, med 27). Following measures were used: the Defensive Pessimism Questionnaire (DPQ), the Life Orientation Test (LOT-R), Adult Dispositional Hope Scale (ADHS) and Unrealistic Optimism Scale. We created three models and evaluated them using confirmatory factor analysis. The first model was first order factor analysis model with correlated factors represented by individual measures. The second model implemented a second order factor of general optimism. The third model used two second order correlated factors - optimism and hope. We consider model three as the best suited both statistically and for interpretation. Our model corresponds to Snyder’s concept (in Chang, 2002), who views his construct of hope more actively and specifically in comparison to optimism. Optimism focuses more broadly on the expected quality of future outcomes in general.
ER -
DOSEDLOVÁ, Jaroslava, Martin JELÍNEK, Helena KLIMUSOVÁ and Iva BUREŠOVÁ. Positive Expectations – Optimism and Hope in Models. Online. In Bekirogullari, Zafer; Minas, Melis Y.; Thambusamy, Roslind X. \textit{The European Proceedings of Social \&{} Behavioural Sciences}. Amsterdam: Future Academy, 2016, p.~436-447. ISSN~2357-1330. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2016.11.45.
|
