Does timeframe adjustment of the Life Orientation Test-Revised assess optimism as a state?

Huffman, Jeff C.; Legler, Sean; Millstein, Rachel; Gomez-Bernal, Federico; Celano, Christopher M.; Chung, Wei-Jean; Healy, Brian C.

doi:10.1080/17439760.2019.1579355

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…State optimism may explain additional variance above that of trait optimism in some domains [4], but a modified instrument may not be valid or enough to capture differences in state optimism [88]. A recent study compared the use of a timeframe modified "state" LOT-R to the original LOT-R and showed that the "state" LOT-R did not change more than the LOT-R, indicating that its use as a measure of changeable state optimism is not warranted [55]. Thus, a specific state optimism measure is needed, and changes over time and situation will be assessed in future validation studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Modified previously validated measures do not necessarily have acceptable psychometric properties [54], so a modified LOT-R may not adequately capture state optimism. In a recent analysis, the mean score of a modified "state" LOT-R did not change over time in a positive psychology intervention in a cardiac population and did not adequately capture optimism as a state [55]. State optimism using the modified LOT-R has been found to correlate with trait optimism, but state optimism relative to trait optimism, predicts additional variance in affect, distress, and task performance [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Development of the State Optimism Measure

Millstein

Chung

Hoeppner

et al. 2019

General Hospital Psychiatry

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Optimism, or positive expectations about the future, is associated with better health. It is commonly assessed as a trait, but it may change over time and circumstance. Accordingly, we developed a measure of state optimism. Methods: An initial 29-item pool was generated based on literature reviews and expert consultations. It was administered to three samples: sample 1 was a general healthy population (n=136), sample 2 was people with cardiac disease (n=96), and sample 3 was persons recovering from problematic substance use (n=265). Exploratory factor analysis and item-level descriptive statistics were used to select items to form a unidimensional state optimism measure (SOM). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to test fit. Results: The selected seven SOM items demonstrated acceptable to high factor loadings on a single dominant factor (loadings: .64-.93). There was high internal reliability across samples (Cronbach's alphas: .92-.96), and strong convergent validity correlations in hypothesized directions. The SOM's correlations with other optimism measures indicate preliminary construct validity. CFA statistics indicated acceptable fit of the SOM model. Conclusions: We developed a psychometrically-sound measure of state optimism that can be used in various settings. Predictive and criterion validity will be tested in future studies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Development of the State Optimism Measure

Millstein

Chung

Hoeppner

et al. 2019

General Hospital Psychiatry

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is unlikely, as prior studies have demonstrated that without targeted intervention, DO is a stable metric, even across stressful life events such as the diagnosis of cancer, 43 or undergoing major cardiac surgery. 44 Second, while we had self-report data on mood and anxiety disorders (historical and current collected together) we neither collected any mental health measures/scales, nor were we able to follow participants longitudinally into the postpartum period, so we could not evaluate if birth trauma or postpartum mental health conditions developed. Third, we did not evaluate people undergoing a scheduled cesarean section, which is likely a different experience from a perceived control over the birth process perspective.…”

Section: Strengths and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dispositional Optimism, Mode of Delivery, and Perceived Labor Control among Recently Delivered Parturients

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Dispositional optimism (DO) is an understudied transdiagnostic resilience factor among peripartum individuals. Low DO is associated with increased fear and pain in labor and increased rates of emergent cesarean delivery, but it is unknown whether DO is associated with perceived control over the labor process. Study design: This a planned secondary analysis of a prospective observational cohort of term parturients (n=164) who were recruited in July and August 2021 during their delivery hospitalization at a single, tertiary medical center. Participants completed a baseline demographic survey prior to delivery and then completed evaluations of DO (Revised Life-Orientation Test, LOT-R) and control over the labor process (Labour Agentry Scale- LAS) during their postpartum hospitalization. DO was dichotomized into low and high by score of ≤ 14 or >14 on LOT-R, respectively, and labor agentry scores were compared between groups. Maternal demographics, pregnancy and delivery characteristics were compared by DO status. Multivariable regression was performed, adjusting for known confounders (induction, labor analgesia and mode of delivery). Results: Demographic, pregnancy and neonatal characteristics were similar between those with low compared to high DO. People with low DO had significantly higher rates of cesarean section (44 vs 24%, p=0.02) and overall had lower LAS scores (139.4 vs 159.4, P<0.001), indicating that they felt less control over their labor process than those with high DO. In the multivariable regression, those with low DO had higher odds of a low LAS score after controlling for induction, labor analgesia, and mode of delivery (aOR 1.29, 95% CI 1.20-1.39). Conclusions: People with low DO had significantly lower perceived control over their labor, even after controlling for differences in mode of delivery. Interventions to alter DO may be an innovative way to improve birth experience and its associated perinatal mental health morbidities.

show abstract

“…In this study, a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of .61 was found. This scale was used because it is currently the most utilized optimism scale (Huffman et al, 2019). Although there is a lack of consensus about the factorial structure of the LOT-R (Carver et al, 2010), this study adopted the recommendation of Cano- Garcia et al (2015) to apply the one-dimensionality approach to the scale with a score resulting from adding the six items, thereby reflecting dispositional optimism.…”

Section: Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, these scales are recent and important instruments for measuring optimism. Hence, the LOT-R is the optimism scale most used around the world (Huffman et al, 2019), while the POS is a measurement tool that is less researched and relatively new (Bharti & Rangnekar, 2019;Kam, 2020).…”

Section: Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Construct, Convergent and Divergent Validity, and Reliability of Three Optimism Scales among North American University Students

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The primary objective of this study is to compare the construct, convergent and divergent validity and the reliability of three optimism scales. The study relied on a nonprobability sample of 100 social work students at Western Michigan University in the United States (Seventy-nine percent of the sample were female, and 21% were male). The sample’s mean age was 26.35 years, SD = 7.70. Sixty-nine percent (69%) of the respondents self-identified as White, and 31% self-identified as African American, Hispanic/Latino, multiethnic, Native American or Asian American. The study used confirmatory factor and multiple regression analyses (CFA and MRA). The findings show that the Life Orientation Test-Revised (LOT-R) and the Personal Optimism Scale (POS) were supported by three indicators of goodness of fit, while the Brief Interactive Optimism Scale-Garcia (BIOS-G) was supported by eight. The LOT-R showed no acceptable internal consistency indicators, but the POS and the BIOS-G showed several good internal consistency indicators. Correlations of all of these scales with the Physical Well-being Scale-Garcia (PWS-G) ranged from r (100) = .303, p = .002 to r (100) = .439, p = .000. The three scales had divergent validity because their scores did not differ by gender (LOT-R: t(100) = −.885, p = .383; POS: t(100) = −.263, p = .794; BIOS-G: t(100) = −.840, p = .407). The findings suggest the advisability of recommending the BIOS-G, which is short and easy to use and understand.

show abstract

Does timeframe adjustment of the Life Orientation Test-Revised assess optimism as a state?

Cited by 10 publications

References 31 publications

Development of the State Optimism Measure

Development of the State Optimism Measure

Dispositional Optimism, Mode of Delivery, and Perceived Labor Control among Recently Delivered Parturients

The Construct, Convergent and Divergent Validity, and Reliability of Three Optimism Scales among North American University Students

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About