Department of Psychology, Hendrix College, Conway, AR What I Want vs. What I Expect: Hope, Optimism, and the Temporal Proximity of Future Outcomes Patricia Bruininks Department of Psychology, Hendrix College, Conway, AR Results Discussion Introduction Expected vs. Goal Grade Hope vs. Optimism Replicates findings that hope and optimism are distinct constructs. Expected grade followed a trend similar to optimism ratings (below). Similar to previous findings, expected grade decreased in anticipation of feedback; however, it did not dip below actual grade. Both expected and goal grade decreased before taking exam, but expected decreased more. Previous research has demonstrated that while hope and optimism are both positive anticipatory states, they are distinct from one another (Bruininks & Malle, 2006). Outcomes that people hope for tend to be more important than those for which they are optimistic. People also tend to hope for – but are not optimistic for - outcomes that afford little personal control. Finally, optimism is more tied to the likelihood of an outcome than hope. That is, when an outcome does not appear likely to occur, a person may not be optimistic but may continue to hope that it will occur, especially if it is important. Optimism was dependent on likelihood of outcome (Fs for state and interaction non-significant), whereas hopefulness was not (Fs for state and interaction significant). Hopefulness was more closely tied to importance than optimism. Hopefulness was experienced differently over time than optimism. Figure 1. There was a main effect for grade, F(1, 20) = 91.711, p < .001; a main effect for time, F(5, 100) = 23.338, p < .001; and an interaction for grade x time, F(5, 100) = 5.737, p < .001. There was a marginally significant cubic trend for grade x time, Fc(1, 20) = 4.067, p = .057. Optimism, Pessimism, and Bracing Hope and optimism are experienced differently in anticipation of self-relevant feedback. Previous research has shown that people tend to be overly optimistic in their predictions about the future. They believe more good things and fewer bad things will happen to them than to others (Weinstein, 1980). Their optimism is also unwarranted given objective information (Armor & Taylor, 1988). However, when people anticipate that their expectations will be challenged, their outlook becomes more realistic and sometimes even pessimistic. This is referred to as bracing (see Shepperd, Sweeny, & Carroll, 2006). This shift occurs when the time to realize an outcome approaches, when individuals feel they have less control over the outcome, and when the outcome is important. Optimism decreased before taking the exam (taking the exam can be seen as self-relevant feedback in and of itself). Hopefulness, on the other hand, did not decrease until after taking the exam, and not as much as optimism. We also measured hoping, which is different from hopefulness (Howington, Crowell, & Bruininks, 2006). It did not decrease over time (F(5, 100) = 1.275, p > .1) and was higher than optimism (F(1, 20) = 25.893, p < .001). Hopefulness implies more positive affect than hoping. Also, hoping is the verb form of hope which implies active investment of the self (optimism does not have a verb form). Positive Anticipatory State x Time Participants were more hopeful than optimistic that they would obtain their goal grade both at the beginning of the semester and right before taking the midterm when optimism dropped sharply. Hopefulness did not decrease until after taking the midterm. Research Questions If people reduce their optimism to brace for disappointment, will they also reduce their hope? Will they do so at the same time point and to the same degree? Figure 2. There was a main effect for state, F(1, 20) = 26.552, p < .001; a main effect for time, F(5,100) = 4.651, p = .001; and an interaction for state x time, F(5,100) = 2.442, p = .039. There was a significant cubic trend for state x time, Fc(1,20) = 7.281, p = .014. Thus, the rules of hope are different from the rules of optimism. People do not lose hope while there is still an opportunity for an outcome to turn out positively (i.e., maybe the exam will be easy). People are “allowed” to hope for unlikely events but they are not allowed to be optimistic for them, at least in terms of self relevant feedback (see Averill, Catlin, & Chon, 1990). Appraisals about Goal Grade x Time Method 27 undergraduates completed a questionnaire 4 times before and twice after taking the midterm. They completed the questionnaire 3 times earlier in the semester; a 4th time right before taking the exam; a 5th time one week after taking the exam; and a 6th time immediately following notification that they would be getting their test back but before seeing their grade. (6 students did not complete all questionnaires, leaving N=21 participants.) At each time point they stated both their expected and goal grade. They rated how hopeful, optimistic, fearful, and worried they were about obtaining their goal grade. They also rated the importance and likelihood of getting that grade and their personal control over getting that grade. All ratings were made on a 9-point scale. There is no difference between ratings of optimism (above) and likelihood. There is no effect of time for importance; thus, the outcome remains important for all 6 time points (M = 7.61). References Armor, D. A., & Taylor, S. E. (1998). Situated optimism: Specific outcome expectancies and self-regulation. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.) Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 309-379). New York: Academic Press. Averill, J. R., Catlin, G., & Chon, K. K. (1990). Rules of hope. New York: Springer-Verlag. Bruininks, P., & Malle, B. F. (2006). Distinguishing hope from optimism and related affective states. Motivation and Emotion. Howington, D. E., Crowell, A. L., & Bruininks, P. (2007, January). Hoping is different from hope: Unique experiential features in the measurement of emotion. Poster to be presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Memphis, TN. Shepperd, J. A., Sweeny, K., & Carroll, P. J. (2006). Abandoning optimism in predictions about the future. In L.J. Sanna and E. C. Chang (Eds.) Judgments over time (pp. 13-33). New York: Oxford University Press. Weinstein, N. D. (1980). Unrealistic optimism about future life events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 806-820. Figure 3. There was a main effect for appraisal, F(2, 40) = 23.875, p < .001; a main effect for time, F(5, 100) = 6.1, p < .001; and an interaction for appraisal x time, F(10, 200) = 5.294, p < .001. There was a significant cubic trend for appraisal x time, Fc(1, 20) = 7.24, p = .014.