Re-examining hope: The roles of agency thinking and pathways thinking

Tong, Eddie M. W.; Fredrickson, Barbara L.; Chang, Weining C.; Lim, Zi Xing

doi:10.1080/02699930903138865

Cited by 85 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Tong, et al (2010) note that their findings are consistent with past studies (e.g., Bruininks & Malle, 2005;Feldman, et al, 2009) that highlight agency is more reflective of cognitive expectations related to the feasibility of attaining a specified outcome and not necessarily the actual capacity to generate the means to pursue the goal. Tong, et al (2010) mention that agency type thinking represents more of what is thought of when individuals think of hope in general and as they put it into operation in their circumstances from both a cognitive and behavioral aspect. Given these findings, the capacity for hope reflected in the H-CAP 21 appears congruent with this definition as reflected in the wording of the items measuring this construct.…”

Section: H-cap Scale Developmentsupporting

confidence: 81%

“…As noted, Snyder et al (1996) defines "hope as a cognitive set comprising agency (belief in one's capacity to initiate and sustain actions) and pathways (belief in one's capacity to generate routes) to reach goals. (p.321)" Multiple studies have questioned whether agency thinking combined with pathways thinking truly characterizes the average person's understanding of hope (Bruininks & Malle, 2005;Tong, et al, 2010). Similar to these studies, a recent study conducted by Tong, et al (2010) found via multiple cross-cultural studies that only Snyder's agency items (state and trait) were positively related to hope.…”

Section: H-cap Scale Developmentsupporting

confidence: 48%

“…(p.321)" Multiple studies have questioned whether agency thinking combined with pathways thinking truly characterizes the average person's understanding of hope (Bruininks & Malle, 2005;Tong, et al, 2010). Similar to these studies, a recent study conducted by Tong, et al (2010) found via multiple cross-cultural studies that only Snyder's agency items (state and trait) were positively related to hope. Additionally, they note that the agency items (for both trait and state versions) do not seem to be measuring perceived capacity for executing goals-related actions.…”

Section: H-cap Scale Developmentmentioning

confidence: 47%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Development and Validation of the High Capacity Model of Resilience and Well-being Scale 21 (H-CAP 21)

Barclay¹,

Barclay²

2017

JPBS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The research on resilience has been hampered from a lack of a specific definition that can operationalized for measurement. The High Capacity Model of Resilience and Well-Being (H-CAP21) is a new theoretical model that defines specific traits that create states of resilience and well-being for use as a screening tool in clinical and nonclinical settings. Norming was completed across two studies with a total population of 1442 participants comprised of a clinical population of inpatient psychiatric patients and a non-clinical population of adult midcareer graduate students. A four-factor model represented by a 21-item scale was confirmed as a best fit. Individual subscales yielded alpha's from .75-.92, convergent validity with the Resilience Scale and discriminatory validity with and Obsessive Passion subscale and the Beck Depression Inventory-II. Criterion-related validity exhibited a positive directional relationship between the subscales with the criterion (cumulative GPA) and significant correlations with the overall scale score and commitment subscale. However, the remaining subscales did not reach a level of significance with the criterion. Further exploration of the H-CAP 21 will expand the type and setting of the populations the instrument is assessed with to include clinical populations, military applications, self-regulation, and motivation. The H-CAP 21 is believed to have clinical utility as a psychometrically sound screening tool.

show abstract

Section: H-cap Scale Developmentsupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: H-cap Scale Developmentsupporting

confidence: 48%

Section: H-cap Scale Developmentmentioning

confidence: 47%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Development and Validation of the High Capacity Model of Resilience and Well-being Scale 21 (H-CAP 21)

Barclay¹,

Barclay²

2017

JPBS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Snyder et al (1991) reported acceptable values of internal reliability (Cronbach's alpha in the total scale from .74 to .84; the agency subscale from .71 to .76; and the pathways subscale from .63 to .80). A similar pattern regarding AHS reliability was reported in previous studies (Pais-Ribeiro, Pedro, & Marques, 2006;Phan, 2013;Rand, 2009;Tong, Fredrickson, Chang, & Lim, 2010). Its temporal stability is also acceptable, since the AHS presented a test-retest correlation of .85 (p < .001) after a three-week interval (Snyder et al, 1991).…”

supporting

confidence: 65%

Qualitative and Quantitative Trends in the Assessment of Subjective Temporality

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Similarly, hopefulness, which is related to self-efficacy and strategic planning (Berg et al, 2011), was associated with treatment adherence. From a theoretical perspective, hopefulness may facilitate personal efficacy in identification, planning and movement toward treatment and health-related goals (Tong et al, 2010). Additionally, the goalsetting and motivational consequences of having positive expectations about the future may promote adaptive behavior engagement (Lens et al, 2012), such as treatment compliance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Positive psychological determinants of treatment adherence among primary care patients

Nsamenang

Hirsch

2014

Prim Health Care Res Dev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Patient adherence to medical treatment recommendations can affect disease prognosis, and may be beneficially or deleteriously influenced by psychological factors. Aim: We examined the relationships between both adaptive and maladaptive psychological factors and treatment adherence among a sample of primary care patients. Methods: One hundred and one rural, primary care patients completed the Life Orientation Test-Revised, Trait Hope Scale, Future Orientation Scale, NEO-FFI Personality Inventory (measuring positive and negative affect), and Medical Outcomes Study General Adherence Scale. Findings: In independent models, positive affect, optimism, hope, and future orientation were beneficially associated with treatment adherence, whereas pessimism and negative affect were negatively related to adherence. In multivariate models, only negative affect, optimism and hope remained significant and, in a comparative model, trait hope was most robustly associated with treatment adherence. Implications: Therapeutically, addressing negative emotions and expectancies, while simultaneously bolstering motivational and goal-directed attributes, may improve adherence to treatment regimens.

show abstract

Re-examining hope: The roles of agency thinking and pathways thinking

Cited by 85 publications

References 8 publications

Development and Validation of the High Capacity Model of Resilience and Well-being Scale 21 (H-CAP 21)

Development and Validation of the High Capacity Model of Resilience and Well-being Scale 21 (H-CAP 21)

Qualitative and Quantitative Trends in the Assessment of Subjective Temporality

Positive psychological determinants of treatment adherence among primary care patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About