OPTIMISM AND WELL-BEING IN HUNGARIAN EMPLOYEES: FIRST APPLICATION AND TEST OF A SITUATIONAL JUDGMENT APPROACH TO EXPLANATORY STYLE

IntroductionThe theory of learned optimism (Seligman, 1991) is among the most intensively studied phenomenon in the science of positive psychological functioning (Peterson & Steen, 2009). Unlike other theorists, Seligman conceptualized optimism/pessimism as a personal explanatory style (also referred to as attributional style), i.e., a relatively stable mindset to explain the causes of positive and negative events and situations in terms of three interrelated forms (three different dimensions) of possible explanations with regard to their causes. The Stability (S) dimension refers to the time frame of the causes; whether the actual cause is timely extended, stable vs. unstable. The Globality (G) dimension captures whether the individual sees the actual event as the result of general vs. specific situational factors, i.e. the causes having an effect on other events as well or not. The Internality (I) dimension refers to the role of the individual himself. The internal and external causality attributions place the agency in or outside the person considering the causes of the event.Based on these distinctions between the three dimensions (S, G and I), the explanations as well as the nature of the situation (negative vs. positive), an optimistic mindset can be defined in the following way. For the explanation of negative situations an individual with optimistic explanatory style tends to use external causes along with seeing the situation as particular and temporarily sporadic (e.g., it was caused by somebody else, and it occurred just here and now). On the other hand, in case of positive events an optimistic explanatory style would involve internal causality, along with a generalized and temporarily extended view of the situation (it was me, and it can happen elsewhere and at other times as well). Both patterns of optimism were found to be positively related to better mental health, higher self-esteem, lower depression and lower risk of post-traumatic stress disorder (Peterson & Seligman, 1984; Peterson & Steen, 2009). Measurement of Explanatory StylesWhen it comes to measurement of explanatory styles, there are series of methods described in the literature (Proudfoot, Corr, Guest, & Gray, 2001). First, patterns of different explanation types for previous events may be coded from running texts (Schulman, Castellon, & Seligman, 1989). Second, short story-like explanations may be asked for predefined situations, and the answers may be analyzed for patterns of explanations. Third, individuals may be asked to rate the possible causes of hypothetical, predefined situations along the basic dimensions (e.g., to what extent would the situation be stable in time). The most commonly used measure, the Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ; Peterson, Semmel, von Baeyer, Abramson, Metalsky, & Seligman, 1982) applies the latter strategy providing six negative and six positive events and instructs the respondents to evaluate each situation on three seven point scales, asking whether the actual situation is due to something, to the person, or to others/the circumstances (internality), and whether the cause will be present in the future or not (stability) and does the cause influence other events as well or just the actual one (globality). Despite its popularity, ASQ has also been criticized both for its psychometric and conceptual flaws. Conceptually, the rating of hypothesized situations on a set of highly abstract rating scales (in this case, "internality", "globality" and "stability" of the causes of the actual events) can be questioned because the underlying cognitive process is far from the everyday explanatory process itself. Usually, explanatory processes are largely automatic (Satpute & Lieberman, 2006), follow the event immediately and involve everyday thoughts and words (Peterson, 1991). Consequently, more extended and focused explanatory style measures were suggested, considering both the quantity of the provided situations (Travers, Creed, & Morrissey, 2015) and their thematic focus; for example in academic situations (Peterson & Barrett, 1987) and in work settings (Proudfoot et al. …