What is this article about?

Optimism as a psychological trait has gained an increasing amount of interest from scientists during the past couple of decades. Various studies have shown that optimism is related to important benefits. In this study, a review is presented that summarizes the findings from this body of research.

What are the two main ways in which researchers have defined and operationalized optimism?

Optimism is a psychological trait that influences individuals perceive themselves and their environment, how they process incoming information, and how they decide to act based on that information. Optimism concerns a cognitive, affective, and motivational aspect. Whereas optimists tend to believe that the future will be favorable, pessimists tend to believe that the future will have bad events in store for them. Both optimism and pessimism therefore act as powerful cognitive filters that alter an individuals' perception of the world and influence how the individual reacts and adapts to new situations, in particular challenging and stressful events.

In psychology, a distinction can be made between two main conceptions of optimism as described in the literature: optimistic explanatory style and dispositional optimism.

Optimistic explanatory style

The conceptualization of optimism as an exploratory style was developed by Seligman and colleagues (1991). This conceptualization was inspired by the finding that most humans (and animals) give up and become helpless when they are exposed to uncontrollable stressors. After this, they act helpless even when stressors are controllable again. This phenomenon is called learned helplessness. Individuals who display learned helplessness tend to have a pessimistic explanatory style. They believe negative events are stable and have far reaching consequences ("My life is ruined now"). Often, they blame themselves for the negative events ("It is my fault"). In addition, they commonly do not take credit for positive events ("I was just lucky"). 

Opposite to the pessimistic style is the optimistic explanatory style. This is referred to individuals who never become helpless. They believe negative events are unstable ("Things will go better soon") and specific ("Perhaps this is going less well, but other things are still going well"). Optimists, according to this perspective, acknowledge the presence of bad events, but they consider them in a constructive, non-fatalistic manner.

Dispositional optimism

The second perspective is developed by Schreier and Carver (2009). Here, optimism is based on an expectancy-value model of goal pursuit, which states that individuals pursue goals that are important to them (value) and goals that they feel confident in attaining (expectancy). Optimism and pessimism, then, are considered broad, generalized versions of respectively confidence and doubt pertaining to life, instead of to a specific context.

In contrast to the explanatory style approach in which participants are asked how they interpret certain events, in this perspective, researchers ask participants directly whether they expect events in the future to be positive or negative. As such, this perspective is also known as expectational optimism. It thus measures optimism as the extent to which an individual beliefs future events (rather than past events) will be favourable or unfavourable.

Research about the relationship between these two approaches has been very inconsistent. Some studies reported low correlations, others found a high correlation. These two constructs are believed to be theoretically distinct. Researchers have argued that they should not be considered interchangeable.

What are the benefits of optimism?

Being optimistic has been associated with various beneficial outcomes. In this review, the most interesting findings are highlighted, as a full overview goes beyond the scope of the article. In sum, optimism has been found to be related to:

• Subjective well-being (being happier)
• Health (physically healthier, slower progression of diseases, although there are some mixed findings on this issue)
• Succes (more successful than average, in particular in jobs where one frequently encounters failure, such as selling insurances)
• Social acceptance (other people may like optimists better than pessimists, which has especially impications for politics)

What are the causes of optimism?

Why are some people natural optimists (seeing the glass half full) whereas others cannot help but seeing the glass as half empty? Research has identified various factors that influence the development of optimism, although more research is needed in this area. Common factors are:

• Genetics
• Socio-economic status (lower SES; more pessimistic)

How can optimism be fostered in adults and youth?

Although optimism and pessimism are considered rather stable personality traits, research has shown that cognitive therapy may be beneficial in transforming pessimists into optimists. Cognitive therapy may assist individuals in developing more accurate and constructive explanations for positive and negative events.

What are important areas for future research?

During the past decades, research on optimism has made a substantial contribution to the scientific understanding of this personality trait and its influence on well-being. Additional research, however, is needed. In particular, the authors present some areas of research for the future:

• Continue the search for the biological and brain substrates of optimism. How is optimism formed in childhood and adolescence? How does it develop during life? And via which mechanisms does optimism exert its effects on outcomes such as subjective well-being, health, and success.
• Study the psychological and physiological benefits of adopting a flexible (rather than rigid) optimistic outlook on life. That is, research has shown that being optimistic is a good thing. But common sense tells us that being optimistics may not be the best strategy under all circumstances. For instance, optimists tend to continue gambling after having lost money, more so than pessimists do. Hence, more research could be done toward the value and costs of (unrealistic) optimism.

Year of publication

2017