Cited by 38Optimism, Hope, and Well-beingPsychometric Methodologies and TestingPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction

Optimism scale: evidence of psychometric validity in two countries and correlations with personality.

Open access
Coelho, Gabriel L.H., Vilar, Roosevelt, Hanel, Paul H.P., Monteiro, Renan P., Ribeiro, Maria G.C., Gouveia, Valdiney V.·2018·Personality and Individual Differences

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.paid.2018.06.030

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Trait optimism and trait resilience are buffering factors against stressors in general.

    “Trait optimism and trait resilience are buffering factors against stressors in general (Connor and Davidson, 2003; Coelho et al., 2018).”

    From Predicting the Severity of Symptoms of the COVID Stress Syndrome From Personality Traits: A Prospective Network Analysis (2021) · cites this paper as Coelho et al., 2018

    The 'Explanatory and Dispositional Optimism' section reports beneficial associations for dispositional optimism, including reduced risk of suicidal ideation and greater subjective well-being. It does not establish that optimism buffers against stressors in general, and the paper's discussion does not make that claim about trait resilience. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155-159.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Coelho, G. L. H., Vilar, R., Hanel, P. H. P., Monteiro, R. P., Ribeiro, M. G. C., & Gouveia, V. V.
Affiliations
  • Massey University (NZ)
  • University of Bath (GB)
  • Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso (BR)
  • Universidade Federal da Paraíba (BR)
Corresponding author
Gouveia, Valdiney V.
Venue
Personality and Individual Differences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-11
Volume
134
Pages
245-251
ISSN
0191-8869 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2809597284
Cited by
38
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1
FWCI
4.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Locations
  • Personality and Individual Differences (publishedVersion)
  • Open Access at Essex (University of Essex) (acceptedVersion)
  • Pure (University of Bath) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel
  • National Council for Scientific and Technological Development
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Optimism, Hope, and Well-being
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Keywords
dispositional optimism, optimism scale, psychometric validation, cross-cultural measurement, measurement invariance, Big Five personality traits, subjective well-being, hope, scale reliability, item response theory

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review