p. 802). As Ai, Peterson, Tice, Bolling, and Koenig (2004) observed, ‘hope seems to be more motivational and
emotional, whereas optimism is more strictly attitudinal and expectational’ (p. 437). Consistent with this key
conceptual distinction, hope by virtue of its agency subtrait is more closely linked than optimism to general
self-efficacy ( Bryant & Cvengros, 2004 ).
MEASURES REVIEWED HERE
Because hope and optimism may be best conceptualized as distinct but related constructs, we review these
measures separately and then discuss global and more domain-specific measures of these constructs. In each
case, we review evidence supporting the reliability and construct validity of the relevant measurement
instruments.
Although the instruments most commonly used to assess hope and optimism in current research were origi-
nally developed during the 1990s, these measurement scales continue today to dominate the field of personality,
social psychology, and behavioral medicine. The persistence and popularity of these instruments in contempo-
rary psychosocial research attests to the breadth and depth of their theoretical and psychometric foundations.
Yet, despite the continued dominance of these basic measurement tools, researchers have also developed new
measures of hope and optimism that reflect emerging conceptual advances and refinements, as well as specific
applications concerning future expectations in relation to particular situational or medical conditions. Because
these later developments in measurement build directly on earlier work, we begin by first reviewing the domi-
nant measurement tools for assessing hope and optimism, and then cover more recent advances in assessment of
these important constructs.
Global Measures of Hope
1.Snyder Hope Scale ( Snyder et al., 1991 ) & Children’s Hope Scale (Snyder et al., 1997)
2.Herth Hope Scale & Herth Hope Index ( Herth, 1991, 1992 )
3.Beck Hopelessness Scale ( Beck, 1993 )
4.Hunter Opinions and Personal Expectations Scale ( Nunn, Lewin, Walton, & Carr 1996 )
5.Integrative Hope Scale ( Schrank, Woppmann Mag, Sibitz, & Lauber 2010)
Domain-Specific Measures of Hope
1.Snyder State Hope Scale ( Snyder, Hoza, & Pelham 1996 )
2.Work Hope Scale (Juntenen & Wettersten, 2006)
Global Measures of Optimism
1.Life Orientation Test ( Scheier, Carver, & Bridges 1994 )
2.Generalized Expectancy for Success Scale ( Hale, Fiedler, & Cochran 1992 )
3.Personal and Social Optimism Questionnaire ( Schweizer & Koch, 2001 )
4.Positive and Negative Expectancies Questionnaire ( Olason & Roger, 2001 )
Domain-Specific Measures of Optimism
1.Cancer Patient Optimism Scale (Radwin et al., 2005)
2.HIV Treatment Optimism Scale (Van de Ven et al., 2010)
OVER VIEW OF THE MEASURES
Although several theorists have developed conceptual models of hope, by far ‘the predominant perspective on
hope in the research literature is Snyder’s cognitive conceptualization (e.g., Snyder et al., 1991, Snyder, Sympson,
Michael, & Cheavens; 2001 )’ (Kwon, 2002 , p. 208). Within Snyder’s framework, hope is defined as ‘a cognitive set
that is based on a reciprocally derived sense of successful (a) agency (goal-directed determination) and (b) path-
ways (planning of ways to meet goals)’ ( Snyder et al., 1991 , p. 571). From the perspective of this two-factor frame-
work, agency is a feeling of efficacy that one can work toward a goal and pathways refer to the development of
plans (or ‘ways’) to achieve desired goals (see also Snyder, 1989, 1994, 1995, 2000, 2002 ). Snyder’s model thus48 3. MEASURES OF HOPE AND OPTIMISM
II. EMOTIONAL DISPOSITIONS