Running head: OPTIMISM AND RELATIONS

Abstract

This study investigated the relationship between optimism/pessimism and the personality dimensions of neuroticism and extraversion. Specifically, 75 participants’ scores on the Life Orientation Test-Revised were correlated with their scores on extraversion and neuroticism as measured by the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. Correlational analyses showed a significant negative relationship between both total optimism and optimism subscores and neuroticism, as well as a significant positive relationship between pessimism subscores and neuroticism; however, no significant relationships were found between total optimism, optimism subscores, or pessimism subscores and extraversion. Factor analytic investigation of neuroticism produced two 5-item factors; both individual factors correlated negatively and significantly with total optimism; however, neither factor had a significant effect on the correlation between optimism and neuroticism.

Optimism and Relations to Personality Dimensions

Optimism has enjoyed a growing popularity recently, particularly in regards to its relationship with health and overall well-being; as Chang, Maydeu-Oliveras, and D’Zurilla (1997) note, optimism and life satisfaction are highly related. Similarly, Smith, Pope, Rhodewalt, and Poulton (1989) believe that optimists’ holding of positive expectations for the future leads them to be better able to solve problems, and also experience better health. However, despite the popularity of optimism as a possible predictor in these areas, there has been criticism of the discriminant validity of optimism/pessimism as measured by the Life Orientation Test (Scheier and Carver, 1985) in regards to other personality facets. In particular, various researchers have questioned whether the LOT’s measure of optimism/pessimism, and subsequent predictive power, is due to the independence of the optimism/pessimism construct or the correlation between optimism/pessimism and neuroticism. For example, Smith and associates assert that LOT results do not show discriminant validity with respect to neuroticism. Additionally, they found from their data that optimism as measured by the LOT is "at least as closely correlated with the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (Spielberger, Gorsuch, and Lushene, 1970) and Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale (Taylor, 1953)," which are measures of neuroticism, as it is with optimism as measured by the Generalized Expectancy for Success Scale (Fibel and Hale, 1978). This data indicates that optimism/pessimism as measured by the LOT may actually be partly a measure of neuroticism; consequently, any conclusions drawn from LOT data are suspect to confounding effects. For example, according to data from Smith et al. it is conceivable that what appears to be a result of optimism/pessimism is actually due to neuroticism. That optimism and pessimism may both be subject to neuroticism confounds is explained by viewing them as opposite ends of a unidimensional trait; consequently, although optimism refers to a positive outlook and pessimism refers to a negative outlook, both are measures of a single underlying personality dimension. Scheier, Carver, and Bridges (1994) answered the criticism of the LOT from Smith et al. by pointing that out according to traditionally constructed views, neuroticism is a multidimensional construct; therefore, while optimism/pessimism may show a significant correlation with neuroticism it seems presumptuous to immediately place the optimism/pessimism construct under the umbrella of neuroticism, as there may be an independent factor underlying both optimism and neuroticism and confounding both measures. Additional attention was given to the correlation problem with development of the Life Orientation Test-Revised (Scheier, Carver, and Bridges); the optimism/pessimism correlation with neuroticism was reduced from –0.50, p< .001 to –0.43, p< .001 (LOT and Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey (Guilford, Zimmerman, and Guilford, 1976)). Correlation of LOT-R scores and Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (Eysenck, 1958) neuroticism was found to be –0.36, p< .001. These reductions were accomplished by eliminating from the LOT two positively worded questions that dealt with coping, adding one additional positively worded question, and eliminating one negatively worded question; these changes gave the LOT-R a final count of three positive questions, three negative questions, and four filler questions.

Additionally, it is useful to note that use of the GESS as an optimism measure for construct validation of the LOT is suspect as its questions run toward measuring personal beliefs about attaining specific outcomes, as opposed to the LOT’s concern with generalized expectancies for positive experiences in the future.

Previous studies that have questioned optimism/pessimism as a construct independent from neuroticism, such as Smith and collegues (1989), can be criticized in that they treated optimism/pessimism as unidimensional; consequently, they place both optimism and pessimism in the sphere of neuroticism. These conclusions are weakened by research from Marshall, Wortman, Kusulas, and Vickers (1992), whose factor-analyses found that a two-factor model of optimism was preferred to a unidimensional view. According to their data, Marshall et al. found that, consistent with a two-dimensional view, optimism but not pessimism was associated with extraversion, and pessimism but not optimism was associated with neuroticism. Similarly, Chang et al. (1997) found that when the effects of optimism were controlled, pessimism independently explained variance in symptoms of depression and life satisfaction; they believe that optimism and pessimism are perhaps independent of each other but correlated with different dimensions of personality. Mroczek, Spiro, Aldwin, Ozer, and Bosse (1993) also presented evidence that supports viewing optimism and pessimism as independent constructs. If optimism and pessimism are independent constructs, the confounding effects of neuroticism on optimism would be explained through erroneously placing pessimism in the optimism dimension, thereby introducing neuroticism’s effects on pessimism into an optimism analysis.

It seems logical, in light of such varied results, to examine whether optimism and pessimism are polar ends of a unidimensional construct or bidimensional constructs; additionally, the discriminant validity of optimism/pessimism with respect to neuroticism requires investigation. The present study seeks to investigate these questions further through an investigation of optimism/pessimism and personality dimensions. In light of Marshall et al.’s (1992) study relating pessimism to neuroticism and optimism to extraversion, one logical path of research is to compare LOT- R measures of optimism/pessimism in relation to the personality dimensions of extraversion and neuroticism. Optimism and pessimism, if different constructs, should show relationships with neuroticism and extraversion in accordance with Marshall and associates, Chang et al. (1997), and Mroczek and collegues (1993); additionally, if LOT-R optimism/pessimism has discriminant validity with respect to neuroticism, results similar to those of Scheier, Carver, and Bridges (1994) should be seen.

Method

Undergraduate students from Lyon College and the University of Arkansas Community College at Batesville comprised the pool of participants; 16 participants were from Lyon College and 62 were from the community college. All received class bonus points for participating. Population of the final experimental pool numbered 75 after eliminating three incomplete Eysenck questionnaires; of these 75, 49 participants were female and 26 were male.

Participants signed an informed consent form to acknowledge their willing participation and understanding of the experimental requirements. Optimism/pessimism scores were evaluated using the 10-item LOT-R. Demographic data was recorded on the LOT-R form as a separate section of questions. Extraversion and neuroticism were measured using the 57-item Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. Upon completion and return of the surveys, the participants received a debriefing form.

Participants were given a survey packet after signing the informed consent form and were instructed to return the completed survey packet at the beginning of the next class period. Upon receipt, LOT-R surveys were analyzed to give a total optimism score that consisted of scores on questions 1, 4, 10, and (after reversal) items 3, 7, and 9. An optimism subscore was calculated consisting of items 1, 4, and 10; the pessimism subscore was calculated from items 3, 7, and 9 (not reversed).

Results

Demographic data showed ages ranging from 18 to 46 (M = 21.39, SD = 5.99). Bivariate correlational analysis showed total optimism scores correlated significantly and negatively with neuroticism, r(75) = -.58, p < .01, with r² = 33.99. Similarly, optimism subscale scores were significantly and negatively correlated with neuroticism, r(75) = -.45, p < .01. Pessimism subscale scores showed a significant positive relationship with neuroticism, r(75) = .54, p< .01. However, correlational analysis revealed no significant relationship between extraversion and total optimism scores, optimism subscale scores, or pessimism subscale scores. Factor analysis of neuroticism was done to uncover possible underlying factors and their relationship to total optimism. Initial factor analysis using Varimax rotation with Kaiser normalization produced eight factors; two factors loaded on five items each and were used for further investigation. Factor 1, Functional Disruptions (named by the experimenter), consisted of EPQ questions 26, 35, 43, 45, and 57; these questions share an underlying concern with events that distract from regular activities, such as sleeplessness, having nightmares, being tense, shaking/trembling attacks, and the presence of troubling aches or pains. Factor 2, Emotionality (named by the experimenter), consisted of EPQ items 9, 11, 14, 16, and 50; these questions share a commonality in that they reference how one feels in differing situations, such as talking to strangers, worry about past events, how easily feelings are hurt (in general and when faulted), and feeling "just miserable." Separate subscores on neuroticism were established for the two factors and these subscores were then correlated with total optimism. Functional Disruptions showed a significant negative correlation with total optimism, r(75) = -.43, p < .01; similarly, Emotionality showed a significant negative result, r(75) = -.40, p < .01.

Discussion

This study attempted to build on previous investigations of optimism/pessimism and discover any significant relationships between optimism/pessimism and the personality dimensions of extraversion and neuroticism. Results produced are dissimilar from earlier studies that have shown either of two possibilities: optimism/pessimism weakly related to extraversion and neuroticism (Mroczek et al, 1993), or optimism related to extraversion and pessimism related to neuroticism (Marshall et al., 1992). Results showed that optimism scores, both total and subscale, had a significant negative correlation with neuroticism; similarly, pessimism subscale scores showed a significant positive correlation with neuroticism. No significant correlation between optimism scores (total or subscale) or pessimism subscale scores and extraversion were found. Additional investigation through factor analysis showed two 5-item factors of neuroticism that were negatively and significantly correlated with optimism; however, neither factor proved to be a significant contributor to the relationship between total optimism and neuroticism.

Significance in this study comes from the strong correlation between optimism/pessimism and neuroticism; these results concur with those of Smith et al. (1989), providing evidence that LOT-R optimism does not show discriminant construct validity with respect to neuroticism. Given the moderately strong coefficient of determination between optimism and neuroticism, optimism’s predictive value may actually result from the confounding effects of neuroticism. Additionally, results do not agree with previous studies with respect to LOT-R optimism’s correlation with neuroticism; although data from Scheier, Carver, and Bridges (1994) and Mroczek et al. (1993) showed acceptably low correlations, this study shows a strong correlation between optimism and neuroticism, again indicating that optimism scores could be confounded by neuroticism. With respect to optimism/pessimism being a unidimensional construct, results do support this theory, as optimism subscores correlated negatively and pessimism subscores correlated positively with neuroticism. Additionally, the fact that neither optimism subscales nor pessimism subscales correlated with extraversion but both correlated significantly with neuroticism provides further evidence of the unidimensional nature of optimism.

Discussion of practical implications must take into consideration the fact that this study was small (n = 75) and that females outnumbered males in a 2:1 ratio. The age range and socioeconomic conditions of participants are also representative of the rural north-central Arkansas only; however, results do indicate that further investigation is needed; specifically, there must be further investigation of optimism/pessimism as a construct that is independent of neuroticism effects. It is possible that optimism/pessimism and neuroticism as currently defined and measured are to some extent inseparable; however, just as neuroticism is viewed as multidimensional, the optimism/pessimism construct may also be multidimensional, having one subfactor that shares commonality with neuroticism and subsequently contributes to the significance of the optimism/pessimism and neuroticism correlation.

References

Chang, E. C., Maydeu-Olivares, A., & D’Zurilla, T. J. (1997). Optimism and pessimism as partially independent constructs: Relationship to positive and negative affectivity and psychological well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 433-440.

Eysenck, H. J. (1958). A short questionnaire for the measurement of two dimensions of personality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 42, 14-17.

Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. (1968). Manual for the Eysenck Personality Inventory. San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.

Fibel, B. & Hale, W. D. (1978). The Generalized Expectancy for Success Scale-A new measure. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 924-931.

Guilford, J. S., Zimmerman, W. S., & Guilford, J. P. (1976). The Guilford-Zimmerman Temperament Survey handbook: Twenty-five years of research and application. San Diego, CA:EDITS.

Marshall, G. N., Wortman, C. B., Kusulas, J. W., Hervig, L. K., & Vickers, R. R. (1992). Distinguishing optimism from pessimism: Relations to fundamental dimensions of mood and personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 1067-1074.

Mroczek, D. K., Spiro, A., Aldwin, C. M., Ozer, D. J. & Bosse, R. (1993). Construct validation of optimism and pessimism in older men: Findings from the Normative Aging Study. Health Psychology, 12, 406-409.

Scheier, M. F. & Carver, C. S. (1985). Optimism, coping, and health: Assessment and implications of generalized outcome expectancies. Health Psychology, 4, 219-247.

Scheier, M. F., Carver, C. S., & Bridges, M. W. (1994). Distinguishing optimism from neuroticism (and trait anxiety, self-mastery, and self-esteem): A reevaluation of the life orientation test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1063-1078.

Smith, T. W., Pope, M. K., Rhodewalt, F., & Poulton, J. L. (1989). Optimism, neuroticism, coping, and symptom reports: An alternative interpretation of the life orientation test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 640-648.

Spielberger, C. D., Gorsuch, R. L. & Lushene, R. E. (1970). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Taylor, J. A. (1953). A personality scale of manifest anxiety. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 48, 285-290.