Cited by 3,774Optimism, Hope, and Well-beingPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 65 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

The will and the ways: Development and validation of an individual-differences measure of hope.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from a shortened version of the paper’s full text (it is longer than we read).

## TL;DR

This study examined whether positive personal resources in employees—self-efficacy, optimism, hope, resilience, and engagement—were related to a healthy lifestyle in 67 workers from a Colombian occupational-risk consulting company. The data supported some low positive associations among self-efficacy, engagement, hope, and resilience, but the authors concluded that these resources did not generally align with healthy practices in interpersonal relations, coping, and perceived emotional state.

## Key findings

  • The sample included 67 employees; 76% were female and the mean age was 35.89 years (SD = 7.28).
  • Self-efficacy was mostly high: 61 (91%) were classified as high and 6 (9%) as low.
  • Engagement was generally high: for vigor, 31 (46%) were high and 6 (9%) very high; for dedication, 33 (49%) were high and 27 (40%) very high; for absorption, 28 (42%) were high and 15 (22%) very high.
  • Healthy lifestyle practices were mixed: exercise and physical activity was healthy for 51 (76%), but time of leisure was healthy for 21 (31%), alimentación for 5 (7%), sleep for 10 (15%), interpersonal relations for 1 (1%), coping for 1 (1%), and perceived emotional state for 3 (4%).
  • Spearman correlations showed low but significant associations between self-efficacy and engagement components: vigor ρ = .298, p = .0140, dedication ρ = .211, p = .0014, and absorption ρ = .222, p = .0071.
  • Among engagement and other positive resources, dedication showed no relation with optimism, hope, or resilience, while absorption correlated with hope (ρ = .280, p = .022) and resilience (ρ = .367, p = .002); vigor also related to these resources, according to the discussion.

## Methods

  • Design: Quantitative, non-experimental, cross-sectional, and correlational; the authors originally considered regression models but rejected them after preliminary checks, then used Spearman correlation.
  • Sample/data: 67 voluntary and anonymous employees from one regional branch of a Colombian company providing occupational risk management services; data were collected online after email invitation to 1151 addresses.
  • Measures/analysis: Self-efficacy was measured with the MBI-GS efficacy subscale; optimism with a translated LOT-R; hope with a translated Adult Hope Scale; engagement with the UWES-17; resilience with the ER scale; and healthy lifestyle practices with an adapted CEVJU-R subscale. Data were analyzed in SPSS 21 using frequency distributions and Spearman’s rho.

## Limitations

  • The paper explicitly states that it was a cross-sectional study, which does not allow causal inference.
  • It also states that the convenience sample was very small, which may have biased results and limits generalization.
  • The paper notes that several instruments lacked validation for Colombian populations, and that the online data-collection method did not control how participants answered, which may have reduced internal reliability.
  • Evident from the text: the lifestyle measure was adapted (including omission of the alcohol/tobacco/drug dimension because the manual and questionnaire did not match), so comparability of that part of the measure is uncertain.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-3514.60.4.570

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

48 Not checked yet · 16 Own interpretation · 16 Own result · 5 Own method · 5 No basis given

Verify all 65 references — free account

Show all 24 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 38
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 56
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 4
66 of 66
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The Batería de instrumentos para la evaluación de factores de riesgo psicosocial is the current tool available in Colombia for evaluating psychosocial factors.

    “la herramienta con la que se cuenta actualmente la Batería de instrumentos para la evaluación de factores de riesgo psicosocial”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Las versiones en español de los instrumentos MBI-GS, LOT-R, Adult Hope Scale, UWES y ER miden válidamente los constructos en la población laboral colombiana estudiada, a pesar de que no existen estudios publicados de validación para población colombiana.

    “En la actualidad no existe en Colombia una versión comercial del MBI-GS, ni estudios publicados en los que se analice su validación para población Colombiana”
    “En la actualidad no existe en Colombia una versión del a LOT-R, ni estudios publicados en los que se analice su validación para población Colombiana”
    “Para la fecha de realización del estudio no existe en Colombia una versión de la Escala de esperanza para adultos, ni estudios publicados en los que se analice su validación para población Colombiana”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    La muestra de 67 empleados tiene potencia estadística suficiente para detectar las relaciones de interés.

    “Se contó con la participación voluntaria y anónima de 67 empleados de una de las regionales de una empresa prestadora de servicios en gestión de riesgos laborales de Colombia”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Las respuestas autoinformadas de los participantes reflejan con exactitud sus recursos personales positivos y prácticas de estilo de vida.

    “El cuestionario es un instrumento de auto informe cuyo objetivo es describir los estilos de vida en jóvenes universitarios”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The instruments used measure the intended constructs validly in the Colombian population.

    “también se encuentra como limitante la validación de los instrumentos utilizados, encontrándose que varios de ellos no cuentan con estudios de su validez en población Colombiana”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Participants' self-reports accurately reflect their actual healthy practices and emotional states.

    “sumado a eso está la metodología de recolección de información que no permitió controlar la forma como se le dio respuesta a los instrumentos por parte de los participantes, lo que pudo haber contribuido a la perdida de la confiabilidad interna de los mismos.”
6 of 6

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 40 references

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Acosta, H., Salanova, M. y Llorens, S. (2011). ¿Cómo Predicen las practicas organizacionales el Engagement en el trabajo en equipo? El Rol de la confianza Organizacional . Ciencia y Trabajo, 13 (41), 125-134. Recuperado de: www.cienciaytrabajo.cl
  2. Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. En Ramachaudran, V. (Ed.) Encyclopedia of human behavior (4), 71-81. New York: Academic Press. (Reimpreso en H. Friedman [Ed.], Encyclopedia of mental health. San Diego: Academic Press, 1998). Recuperado de: http://www.happyheartfamilies.citymax.com/f/Self\_Efficacy.pdf
  3. Caballo, V., Navarro, J. y Sierra, J. (1998). Tratamiento conductual de los trastornos del sueño. En Caballo, V. (Ed.). Manual para el tratamiento cognitivo-conductual de los trastornos psicológicos . 285-319. Madrid: Siglo XXI. - Campos, M., Iraurgui, J., Páez, D. y Velasco, C. (2004). Afrontamiento y regulación emocional de hechos estresantes un meta-análisis de 13 estudios. Boletín de Psicología , (82). 25-44. Recuperado de: http://www.uv.es/seoane/boletin/previos/N82-2.pdf
  4. Chang, E. (2001). Introduction: optimism and pessimism and moving beyond the most fundamental question. En Chang, E. (Ed.): Optimism and pessimism. Implications for theory, research and practice . 4- 12. Washington: American Psychological Association.
  5. Fredrickson, B. (2002). Positive emotions. En Tetrick J.(Ed.). Handbook of occupational health psychology. 19-33. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  6. García, N. y Diaz, M. (2010). Relación entre optimismo/pesimismo disposicional,rendimiento y edad en jugadores de fútbol de competición. Revista Iberoamericanda de psicologia del ejercicio y el deporte, 5 (1), 45-60. Recuperado de: http://www.redalyc.org/pdf/3111/311126267004.pdf
  7. Lorente L, Salanova M, Martínez, I., y Schaufeli W. (2008). Extension of the Job Demands-Resources model in the prediction of burnout and engagement among teachers over time. Psicothema. (20), 354-360. Recuperado de: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18674427

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Snyder, C. R., Harris, C., Anderson, J. R., Holleran, S. A., Irving, L. M., Sigmon, S. T., Yoshinobu, L., Gibb, J., Langelle, C., & Harney, P.
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Published
1991
Volume
60
Issue
4
Pages
570-585
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
OpenAlex
W4251240656
Cited by
3,774
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 249 · 2025: 271 · 2024: 307 · 2023: 287 · 2022: 285 · 2021: 269 · 2020: 286 · 2019: 221 · 2018: 191 · 2017: 165 · 2016: 177 · 2015: 147 · 2014: 120 · 2013: 94 · 2012: 88
FWCI
10.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Optimism, Hope, and Well-being
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
hope, individual differences, personality assessment, scale development, scale validation, motivation, optimism

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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