1. HM 13-6 Interesting research exists concerning the concept of hardiness as a stress-moderating variable. Kobasa, Maddi, and Kahn (1982) independently measured levels of hardiness and degree of stress in 259 utility company managers over a 5-year period. They found the highest illness rates among managers who were highly stressed and low in hardiness. Other managers, with differing levels of stress and hardiness, were approximately equal in their rates of illness.

2. HM 13-6 Research has focused on attempting to discover whether one component of hardiness (commitment, challenge, or control) can be isolated as the crucial factor or whether all three are necessary. It is possible that the hardiness concept will be refined in the future because of such research.

3. HM 13-6 Measurement of hardiness is fairly involved because of the three components that make up the construct. Kobasa and Pucetti(1983) derived their hardiness scores by combining scores from several different scales (the alienation from Self, Alienation from Work, and Powerlessness Scales from the Alienation Test; the Security Scale of the California Life Goals Evaluation Schedule; and that Locus of Control Scale).

4. HM 13-6 Kobasa (1985) published a much-shorted sample version of the hardiness scale that allows for simple computation of separate commitment, challenge, and control scores. You may wish to use this scale (HM 13-6) in your class to measure your students’ hardiness to provide a glimpse of what is involved I hardiness.

5. HM 13-6 To compute the three component scores, use the following equations (the numbers are the question numbers): – Control Score (#1 + #7) – (#2 + #8) = ___ – Commitment Score (#3 + #9) – (#4 + #10) = ___ – Challenge Score (#5 + #11) – (#6 + #12) = ___

6. HM 13-6 Total Hardiness Score = – Control + Commitment + Challenge =___ Kobasa (1985) provided the following score categories: – Hardy personality, 10-18 – Moderate hardiness, 0-9 – Low Hardiness, below 0