Development and Validation of an Instrument that Assesses Individual Differences in Threat and Challenge Appraisal

Tomaka, Joe; Palacios, Rebecca; Champion, Camilla; Monks, Stormy M.

doi:10.4172/2167-1044.1000313

Cited by 11 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The present study investigated associations between the Big Five personality traits and the tendency to make challenge-threat appraisals from the perspective of WTT. We did so using a new and unique measure of individual differences in challenge and threat appraisals, the Appraisal of Challenge and Threat Scale (ACTS; Tomaka, Palacios, Champion, & Monks, 2018). The ACTS assesses individual differences in appraisal patterns overall and across multiple domains.…”

Section: The Present Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although each of the 24 stressful events is unique (e.g., you find out that you have a chronic disease; your car will not start before going to work, you're asked to introduce yourself in a public forum ), they cluster in six domains: Unexpected events, conflict situations, public speaking, social situations, financial stressors, and transportation stressors. Thus, the scale provides estimates of challenge‐threat appraisal overall and in six domains (see Tomaka et al., 2018 for a full description of the ACTS development, reliability and construct validation).…”

Section: Personality and Appraisalmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Personality antecedents of challenge and threat appraisal

Tomaka

Magoc

2021

Stress and Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been suggested in personality and emotion theories that traits can influence emotional states and behaviour through interpretive processes such as cognitive appraisals. The present study investigated the relationships between Big Five personality dimensions and the cognitive appraisal processes associated with challenge and threat states in a large sample of municipal firefighters. The study assessed the Big Five traits and cognitive appraisal tendencies using a new measure of challengethreat appraisal that measured appraisals directly and aggregated both across stressful situations and within six specific stressor domains. The results indicated that the Big Five traits related to overall challenge-threat appraisal and their accompanying primary and secondary components in unique and compelling ways, with some traits related more strongly to primary appraisals of situational demands and others related more to secondary appraisals of coping abilities. Overall, the results provide insights into how personality traits are associated with stressrelated emotional experiences.

show abstract

Section: The Present Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Personality and Appraisalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personality antecedents of challenge and threat appraisal

Tomaka

Magoc

2021

Stress and Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Among athletes, Rossato et al (2016) undertook a series of studies to develop a measure of Challenge and Threat in Sport (CAT-Sport) scale. More recently, Tomaka et al (2018) developed an instrument to assess individuals’ disposition to appraise events as challenging or threatening. The aim here is not to provide a thorough review of these instruments; rather the aim is to provide visibility to the range of instruments that are available to the discerning researcher, and to consider some of the issues in the use of measures across situations and contexts.…”

Section: An Evaluative Space Approach To Challenge and Threatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenge and Threat: A Critical Review of the Literature and an Alternative Conceptualization

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, the authors describe a new theory, the Evaluative Space Approach to Challenge and Threat (ESACT). Prompted by the Biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat (BPS: Blascovich and Tomaka, 1996 ) and the development of the Theory of Challenge and Threat States in Athletes ( Jones et al., 2009 ), recent years have witnessed a considerable increase in research examining challenge and threat in sport. This manuscript provides a critical review of the literature examining challenge and threat in sport, tracing its historical development and some of the current empirical ambiguities. To reconcile some of these ambiguities, and utilizing neurobiological evidence associated with approach and avoidance motivation (c.f. Elliot and Covington, 2001 ), this paper draws upon the Evaluative Space Model (ESM; Cacioppo et al., 1997 ) and considers the implications for understanding challenge and threat in sport. For example, rather than see challenge and threat as opposite ends of a single bipolar continuum, the ESM implies that individuals could be (1) challenged, (2) threatened, (3) challenged and threatened, or (4) neither challenged or threatened by a particular stimulus. From this perspective, it could be argued that the appraisal of some sport situations as both challenging and threatening could be advantageous, whereas the current literature seems to imply that the appraisal of stress as a threat is maladaptive for performance. The ESACT provides several testable hypotheses for advancing understanding of challenge and threat (in sport) and we describe a number of measures that can be used to examine these hypotheses. In sum, this paper provides a significant theoretical, empirical, and practical contribution to our understanding of challenge and threat (in sport).

show abstract

“…This result is congruent with previous research (e.g., Lucas et al, 2012), and has two contradictory implications. On one hand, the significant athlete component supports the notion that challenge and threat evaluations are, to some extent, relatively consistent across stressful situations, meaning that psychometric tools that assess individual differences in challenge and threat evaluations hold some merit (e.g., Tomaka et al, 2018). Indeed, such tools are likely to be useful for practitioners interested in selecting ‘challenge responders’ in high-pressure domains (e.g., medicine; Roberts et al, 2015), and researchers looking to monitor the long-term health of serial ‘threat responders’ (O’Donovan et al, 2012).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

“…Despite these important outcomes, little research has explored the consistency (or variability) of challenge and threat, and whether individuals have tendencies to evaluate all stressful situations as more of a challenge or threat. This is surprising given that psychometric tools assessing individual differences in challenge and threat have recently emerged (Tomaka et al, 2018), and that while limited, evidence has hinted that threat evaluations are moderately to highly consistent across situations (e.g., Power and Hill, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Consistent Are Challenge and Threat Evaluations? A Generalizability Analysis

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Viewing stressful situations as more of a challenge than a threat (i.e., coping resources match or exceed situational demands) has been associated with better performance and long-term health. However, to date, little research has examined if individuals have tendencies to evaluate all stressful situations as more of a challenge or threat. Thus, this study used generalizability analyses to investigate the consistency (or variability) of challenge and threat evaluations across potentially stressful situations. 1813 roller derby players (89.0% female; M age = 33 years, SD = 7) read nine stressful vignettes (e.g., injury, non-selection, family illness), before completing self-report items assessing challenge and threat evaluations. Generalizability analyses revealed that the Athlete × Stressor interaction accounted for the greatest amount of variance in challenge and threat evaluations (51.9%), suggesting that athletes had idiosyncrasies in their tendency to view particular stressors as more of a challenge or threat. The Athlete (15.4%) and Stressor (21.9%) components also accounted for a significant amount of variance. While the Athlete component suggested some consistency in challenge and threat evaluations, and that differences existed between athletes in whether they tended to view stressors as more of a challenge or threat, the Stressor component indicated some agreement among the athletes in their tendency to view some stressors as more of a challenge or threat than others. The findings offer direct support for transactional stress theories, and have important implications for practitioners developing stress management interventions.

show abstract

Development and Validation of an Instrument that Assesses Individual Differences in Threat and Challenge Appraisal

Cited by 11 publications

References 38 publications

Personality antecedents of challenge and threat appraisal

Personality antecedents of challenge and threat appraisal

Challenge and Threat: A Critical Review of the Literature and an Alternative Conceptualization

How Consistent Are Challenge and Threat Evaluations? A Generalizability Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About