Experimental Analysis of a Web-Based Training Intervention to Develop Positive Psychological Capital
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
姝 Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2008, Vol. 7, No. 2, 209 –221.
........................................................................................................................................................................
Experimental Analysis of a
Web-Based Training
Intervention to Develop Positive
Psychological Capital
FRED LUTHANS
University of Nebraska–Lincoln
JAMES B. AVEY
Central Washington University
JAIME L. PATERA
University of Nebraska–Lincoln
Psychological capital with components of hope, self-efficacy, optimism, and resiliency has
recently emerged as a core construct in taking positive psychology to the workplace. A
distinguishing feature is that it is “state-like” and thus open to development. We analyze
whether such psychological capital can be developed through a highly focused, 2-hour
web-based training intervention. Using a pretest, posttest experimental design (n ⴝ 187
randomly assigned to the treatment group and n ⴝ 177 to the control group), we found
support that psychological capital can be developed by such a training intervention.
........................................................................................................................................................................
Although the importance of positivity has been personal development literature and techniques),
given attention through the years, only recently and also being state-like. This “state-like” criterion
has it been proposed as a new (or at least renewed) means that the capacity must be malleable and
lens to focus study on organizational behavior open to development, as opposed to trait-like, rel-
(Cameron, Dutton, & Quinn, 2003; Luthans, 2002a, atively fixed, as is found in widely recognized Big
2002b; Luthans & Youssef, 2007; Luthans, Youssef, & Five personality characteristics (Mount & Barrick,
Avolio, 2007; Nelson & Cooper, 2007; Roberts, 2006; 1995); core self-evaluations (self-esteem, general-
Turner, Barling, & Zacharatos, 2002; Wright, 2003). ized efficacy, locus of control, and emotional sta-
Drawn from the recent positive psychology move- bility; Judge & Bono, 2001); or positive affectivity
ment (Peterson, 2006; Peterson & Seligman, 2004; (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988). The psychologi-
Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000; Snyder & cal resources that have been determined to best
Lopez, 2002) and to differentiate from the more meet these definitional criteria of positive organi-
macro-oriented positive organizational scholar- zational behavior are hope, efficacy, optimism,
ship (Cameron & Caza, 2004; Cameron et al., 2003; and resilience (Luthans, 2002a; Luthans & Youssef,
Spreitzer & Sonenshein, 2004), Luthans (2002b: 59) 2007; Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007).
has defined positive organizational behavior as Theory development (Luthans & Avolio, 2008;
“the study and application of positively oriented Luthans & Youssef, 2004; Luthans & Youssef, 2007;
human resource strengths and psychological ca- Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007) and accumulat-
pacities that can be measured, developed, and ef- ing research (Avey, Wernsing, & Luthans, 2008;
fectively managed for performance improvement Avey, Patera, & West, 2006; Luthans, Avolio, Avey,
in today’s workplace.” & Norman, 2007; Luthans, Avey, Clapp-Smith, & Li,
As indicated in this definition, the specific crite- 2008; Luthans, Avolio, Walumbwa, & Li, 2005) indi-
ria to determine positive capacities include being cate that the identified positive organizational be-
based on theory and research with valid measure- havior states may represent a single latent, core
ment (to differentiate from the popular positive factor termed psychological capital, or simply Psy-
209
Copyright of the Academy of Management, all rights reserved. Contents may not be copied, emailed, posted to a listserv, or otherwise transmitted without the copyright holder’s
express written permission. Users may print, download or email articles for individual use only.210 Academy of Management Learning & Education June
Cap. PsyCap is defined as “an individual’s posi- resilience as indicators of the core factor of psycho-
tive psychological state of development and is logical capital be developed in a highly focused,
characterized by: (1.) having confidence (self-effi- short duration, web-based intervention?”
cacy) to take on and put in the necessary effort to
succeed at challenging tasks; (2.) making a posi- THEORETICAL FOUNDATION
tive attribution (optimism) about succeeding now
and in the future; (3.) persevering toward goals, The theory building for the four positive states and
and when necessary, redirecting paths to goals the core construct of PsyCap have been covered in
(hope) in order to succeed; and (4.) when beset by detail elsewhere (e.g., see Luthans, 2002a, 2002b;
problems and adversity, sustaining and bouncing Luthans & Avolio, 2008; Luthans, Avolio et al., 2007;
back and even beyond (resiliency) to attain suc- Luthans & Youssef, 2007; Luthans, Youssef, &
cess” (Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007: 3). Avolio, 2007). However, for the purposes of this
Although research studies are demonstrating study, we will briefly summarize this theoretical
the impact that PsyCap may have on performance foundation and then concentrate more on the de-
(Luthans, Avolio et al., 2007; Luthans, Avey et al., velopmental potential of PsyCap through a short
2008; Luthans et al., 2005; Luthans, Norman et al., web-based training intervention.
2008; Youssef & Luthans, 2007), satisfaction and/or
commitment (Larson & Luthans, 2006; Luthans, The Hope State
Avolio et al., 2007; Luthans, Norman et al., 2008; Although each of the four identified states under-
Youssef & Luthans, 2007) and absenteeism (Avey, lying PsyCap are commonly used in everyday lan-
Patera, & West, 2006), to date there has only been guage, in the field of positive psychology, they are
practical guidelines and unpublished preliminary characterized by a strong theoretical foundation,
evidence that it can be developed through the pro- considerable research, and valid measures. For
posed Psychological Capital Intervention (PCI) example, Snyder and colleagues have defined
model (see Luthans, Avey, Avolio, Norman, & hope as a “positive motivational state [italics
Combs, 2006; Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007). In added] based on an interactively derived sense of
particular, development and empirical assessment successful (a) agency (goal directed energy) and (b)
of PsyCap through a technology (i.e., Internet) me- pathways (planning to meet goals)” (Snyder, Irv-
diated intervention has not been attempted. ing, & Anderson, 1991: 287). Thus, hope consists of
Explicit in this web-based intervention model is three major conceptual foundations: agency, path-
the focus on the developmental nature of each ways, and goals. Specifically, hope is the aggre-
component (i.e., hope, self-efficacy, optimism, and gate of the agency, or goal-directed determination/
resilience), as well as when combined, develop- willpower, and the pathways, the ways to achieve
ment of the underlying core construct of PsyCap. goals (Snyder et al., 1991). The willpower-and-path-
We propose this web-based PsyCap intervention ways thinking operates in a combined iterative
represents a conceptual and pragmatic progres- process in order to generate hope (Snyder, 2000).
sion from teaching and training principles deliv- Although sometimes presented as dispositional,
ered face-to-face that have traditionally focused on the developmental capacity of hope has been
developing human capital (who you are in terms of clearly supported (Snyder, 2000; Snyder et al., 1991;
knowledge, experience, and skills) to expanding to Snyder et al., 1996). For example, in clinical appli-
the development of the more recently recognized cations, there is evidence that hope can be learned
psychological capital (who you are and what you through an intentional focus on solution-based
can become; Luthans, Luthans, & Luthans, 2004; training interventions (Snyder, 1994), and more re-
Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007). cently, Snyder and colleagues (2000, 2002) have
We propose the time has come to focus training demonstrated the developmental nature of state
interventions on developing positive psychologi- hope across multiple studies using a goal-based
cal state-like capacities, such as PsyCap, that can framework. Based on this body of research, we
be constructed and operationalized for web deliv- posit that hope can also be developed in organiza-
ery. Such web-based interventions can take ad- tional participants through a carefully designed
vantage of the benefits of speed, convenience, cost, (described in the following Methods section) web-
and effectiveness in the field of leadership and based training intervention.
human resource development. The purpose of this
study is to test the feasibility and effectiveness of
The Efficacy State
such a development strategy by addressing the
following research question: “Can the four psycho- Self-efficacy, or “one’s conviction (or confidence)
logical resources of hope, efficacy, optimism, and about his or her abilities to mobilize the motiva-2008 Luthans, Avey, and Patera 211
tion, cognitive resources or courses of action cussed plausible change in an optimistic direction
needed to successfully execute a specific task and propose the need of intervention strategies to
within a given context” (Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998: portray the developmental nature of optimism.
66) is based on Bandura’s (1986, 1997) social cogni- Overall, optimism development has been used in
tive theory. His widely recognized sources of effi- clinical interventions, practitioner-oriented leader-
cacy development include task mastery, vicarious ship books, and has been theorized and researched
learning or modeling, social persuasion, and psy- by widely recognized positive psychologists. Thus,
chological or physiological arousal. we propose that the optimism of organizational par-
First, when employees successfully execute a ticipants can be open to development in a web-
given task, they have enacted task mastery over based training intervention.
that particular task, increasing self-efficacy. Sec-
ond, employees’ efficacy may be increased when
The Resilience State
they vicariously learn by watching relevant others
accomplish the task (i.e., modeling processes). This Resilience, the fourth state-like construct deter-
source of efficacy development has foundations in mined to meet the criteria of psychological capital,
Bandura’s (1986) social learning theory with an em- is identified in positive psychology as one’s abil-
phasis on the modeling process. Third, when rele- ity, when faced with adversity, to rebound or
vant, respected others (e.g., managers or peers) “bounce back” from a setback or failure (Block &
express confidence in the employee’s ability to Kremen, 1996; Masten et al., 1985). It has been tra-
execute a given task or provide positive feedback ditionally focused on “at risk” youth who succeed
on progress, efficacy is enhanced. Fourth, efficacy despite severe odds and adversity. Positive emo-
is developed through psychological and physio- tions have been shown empirically to enhance re-
logical arousal, or the belief that one is mentally silience in the face of negative events (Tugade,
and/or physically fit to accomplish the task. Each Fredrickson, & Barrett, 2004). As this dynamic
source of efficacy can be considered a strategy for learning process of resilience focuses on positive
use in a web-based training intervention whereby adaptation, developmental interventions serving
participants may learn to be efficacious in task- or to maximize assets or resources and minimize risk
domain-specific applications. factors (Masten, 2001; Masten & Reed, 2002) provide
successful strategies for resilience-focused inter-
ventions (Bonanno, 2005; Luthans, Vogelgesang, &
The Optimism State
Lester, 2006; Schoon, 2006) that can be incorporated
Similar to hope, optimism is commonly discussed, into a web-based training intervention.
but in positive psychology, Seligman (1998) utilizes
an attribution or explanatory style to understand
The Psychological Capital Core Construct
it. He defines optimists as those who make inter-
nal, stable, and global attributions regarding pos- The theory and research on a higher order, core
itive events (e.g., goal achievement), but attribute construct of psychological capital (PsyCap) com-
external, unstable, and specific reasons for nega- prised of hope, efficacy, optimism, and resilience
tive events (e.g., a missed deadline). Carver and has been supported by recent research (Luthans,
Scheier (2002) offer complementary work with dis- Avolio et al., 2007). The identification of such
tinct theoretical underpinnings utilizing an expect- second-order factors has become increasingly
ancy framework noting, “optimists are people who common in organizational behavior research. Exam-
expect good things to happen to them; pessimists ples include transformational leadership comprised
are people who expect bad things to happen to of idealized influence, individualized consideration,
them” (2002: 231). intellectual stimulation, and inspirational motiva-
Like hope, optimism has been theorized to have tion (Avolio, Bass, & Jung, 1999); empowerment com-
both trait-like and, more applicable to this theoret- prised of meaning, competence, self-determination,
ical foundation for PsyCap, state-like characteris- and impact (Spreitzer, 1995); and core self-evalua-
tics. For example, Seligman (1998) demonstrates tions consisting of self-esteem, generalized efficacy,
the developmental nature of optimism with his locus of control, and emotional stability (Judge &
concept of “learned optimism.” This argument was Bono, 2001).
suggested many decades ago as Beck (1967) pro- The conceptual independence and discriminant
vided theory and research on developing optimis- validity of hope, optimism, efficacy, and resilience
tic expectations in clinical patients. In addition, have been theoretically presented (e.g., see
although often associated with dispositional opti- Luthans, Avolio et al., 2007; Snyder, 2002) and em-
mism, Carver and Scheier (2002) have recently dis- pirically demonstrated (e.g., Avey et al., 2006; Bry-212 Academy of Management Learning & Education June
ant & Cvengros, 2004; Carifio & Rhodes, 2002; someday be the practical legacy of positive psy-
Luthans, Avolio et al., 2007; Magaletta & Oliver, chology” (Seligman, Steen, Park, & Peterson, 2005:
1999; Youssef & Luthans, 2007) in the positive psy- 410).
chology and positive organizational behavior liter- Despite the continuous technological advance-
ature. In addition, allied theoretical support for ments and increased knowledge surrounding In-
PsyCap as a second-order core construct can be ternet interventions in clinical psychology (e.g.,
found in psychological resources theory (see Hob- see Ritterband et al., 2003), except for Seligman et
foll, 2002) and Fredrickson’s (2001) broaden-and- al.’s (2005) work on the learned properties of hap-
build theory of positive emotions. Law, Wong, and piness and optimism, little work has focused on
Mobley (1998) have also suggested that multidi- on-line positivity interventions, and none has been
mensional constructs such as psychological re- applied to the development of PsyCap. However,
sources, or, in this case psychological capital, may an increasingly suggested supplement for tradi-
be better understood in terms of an underlying core tional interventions has been the use of the Inter-
factor. This is especially evident when constructs net as a viable media and, especially relevant to
are highly related yet integrated with each other. this study’s training intervention, with the direct
For example, faced with a setback, if highly resil- focus on developing positivity and the flourishing
ient employees with the ability to bounce back are of individuals in both the academic classroom and
also self-efficacious and highly hopeful, they will the workplace.
be motivated to persist and put forth the required Much debate has surfaced in the past 20 years in
effort to overcome the problem, as well as pursue the learning and education scholarly community
alternate pathways in order to return to their orig- with regard to the attributes and effectiveness of
inal level or beyond where they were before the various media on learning. For example, many
adverse event. Moreover, those high in optimism years ago Clark (1983) made the claim that there
may have a positive perspective in general, but
are no learning benefits gained from the media,
combined with efficacy and hope, may also have
but rather the media is a vehicle that only delivers,
the persistence to pursue many alternative path-
not “causes,” learning. Furthermore, he posited
ways when necessary to achieve their optimistic
that it is the instructional methods that cause
expectations and goals.
learning, not the media (Clark, 1994). Despite the
Related support for PsyCap as a core construct
controversial arguments around the issue of
can also be drawn from the broaden-and-build the-
whether media impacts learning, there is general
ory. Frederickson provides both theoretical and
agreement that media and its attributes have sig-
empirical evidence that positive emotions trigger
“upward spirals” of broader thinking, functioning, nificant influences on the cost and speed of learn-
and well-being (Fredrickson & Joiner, 2002). These ing, and relevant to the on-line intervention used
processes act in a combinatorial way with each in the present study, that “only the use of adequate
other to effect what she refers to as “broaden-and- structural methods will influence learning” (Clark,
build.” PsyCap is proposed to also act in such an 1994: 27). The intent of the web-based delivery of
integrated, interactive, and broadening way with the PsyCap intervention used in this study was not
its factors of hope, efficacy, optimism, and resil- only to take advantage of the ease of implementa-
iency in the motivated and motivating pursuit of tion, delivery, cost, and accessibility, but to focus
success and desirable organizational outcomes on the structural methods used to impact learning
(see Luthans, Avolio et al., 2007; Luthans & Youssef, and development of PsyCap.
2007; Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007). In the last decade, with dramatically increasing
use of on-line methods to deliver education, train-
ing, and interventions, a number of studies have
ON-LINE INTERVENTION TECHNOLOGY examined its effectiveness. Recent meta-analytic
Besides the theoretical and research foundation for results of these studies indicate that web-based
psychological capital, a brief review of on-line in- instruction may in some ways be as effective, or for
tervention technology is also needed as background certain types of learning more effective, than
for the study. The greatly increased demand of web- traditional face-to-face classroom instruction (Sitz-
based products, service, and treatment delivery car- mann, Kraiger, Stewart, & Wisher, 2006). Specifi-
ries over to human resource development. Analo- cally, equivalent support for face-to-face and web-
gously, Seligman and colleagues recently called based delivery was found for trainee satisfaction
for the advancement of positive interventions in and procedural knowledge, but for learning, de-
clinical applications that can “supplement tradi- clarative knowledge the web-based approach was
tional interventions that relieve suffering and may more effective (Sitzmann et al., 2006). Such findings2008 Luthans, Avey, and Patera 213
support the use of the on-line PsyCap training in- spectrum of behavioral health programs, such as
tervention. tobacco cessation and hypnotherapy (Jerome et al.,
Ritterband and colleagues (2003) provide some 2000). Given the emergence of technological so-
specific steps that Internet interventions should phistication in Internet delivery, learning, develop-
follow to be effective. These guidelines include ment, data collection, and accessibility, we pro-
personalization and a multimedia approach. The pose that PsyCap as a core construct can be
PsyCap training intervention in the present developed through a web-based intervention by
study followed these suggestions by utilizing drawing on the recognized developmental guide-
personalized animation, detailed PowerPoints, lines of each PsyCap component (i.e., hope, effi-
and personalized exercises coupled with video cacy, optimism, and resilience).
commentary by a facilitator (one of the research- Based on the theory building and research to
ers). The intent was to maximize the learning
date on psychological capital and the emergence
and development of PsyCap (more specific de-
of technologically sound Internet, web-based de-
tails of the intervention are provided in the pro-
livery of experimental interventions, we derive the
cedures section that follows). A meta-analysis by
following hypothesis for this study to test:
Bernard and colleagues (2004) on distance edu-
cation also supports the use of our multimedia Hypothesis: Psychological capital as a core positive
approaches. This meta-analysis found that non- construct can be developed in employ-
interactive video was one of the top predictors of ees through a short, highly focused web-
learning and achievement and provides further based intervention structured around
support for the use of supplementary visual ma- the recognized developmental guide-
terials (Bernard et al., 2004). lines of the four PsyCap components
Beyond the potential advantages to learning and (hope, efficacy, optimism, and resil-
development, the use of web-based interventions ience).
in research provides other significant benefits. For
example, Internet data collection allows for the
direct downloading of data, which decreases the
METHODS
risk of human error. A larger, more distinct advan-
tage of Internet interventions is the cost effective- This study used a pretest, posttest control group
ness and the potential of vast accessibility. De- experimental design utilizing a heterogeneous
spite these recognized advantages, considerable sample of 364 working adults representing a wide
debate has recently surfaced regarding the use of cross-section of industries including manufactur-
the Internet for research purposes. For example, ing, service, sales, and government. The sample
Gosling and colleagues (2004) addressed the bias size for the treatment group included 187 partici-
controversies of Internet research and concluded pants, and the control group included 177 partici-
that Internet data can be just as diverse as tradi- pants. Participants were recruited through univer-
tional methods of research. They argue that partic- sity contacts and then were sent an e-mail by the
ipants in web-based studies are no more psycho- researchers for participation in an on-line “posi-
logically disturbed, and are no less likely to take tive leadership training” session. Respondents
the study seriously than those participating in tra- were randomly assigned to either the control or
ditional research methods. These types of findings
treatment group through a private and secure sur-
support the delivery of experimental interventions
vey generator. A slight majority (59%) of the partic-
via the Internet.
ipants were in nonmanagement roles, but a signif-
The rapid development of technology and in-
icant amount (41%) were first-level supervisors or
creased sophistication in delivering various meth-
ods enabled the present study to adequately lever- higher. Additional demographics of the sample in-
age and operationalize PsyCap developmental cluded a mean age of 32.2 years and an average
models such as the recently proposed PCI (psycho- job tenure of 12.1 years. The majority of partici-
logical capital intervention) model (see Luthans, pants were Caucasian (88.5%) with 5.8% unre-
Avey et al., 2006; Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007) ported, 3.3% Asian, 1.4% African-American, and
for quicker adaptation and implementation at a Hispanic and Native American groups comprising
fraction of both the time and cost of traditional less than 1% of the total sample. The majority of the
training interventions, and also have more ready participants had an associate’s degree or higher. A
accessibility. For example, clinical and behavioral third of the total participants had obtained a bach-
development programs have recently surfaced elor’s degree and 11% had a master’s or doctorate
with Internet applications. These include a broad degree.214 Academy of Management Learning & Education June
Intervention Procedures and Treatment ate specific courses of action for the work situa-
tions they previously termed challenging and
All participants were sent a URL, which led them to
that lacked a course of action.
the initial intervention web page. Here they regis-
To put closure on the first session, the Flash
tered using their e-mail address and were pro-
presentation was stopped, and participants were
vided an 8-digit random identification code used
prompted to engage in self-reflection exercises.
for aligning pre- and postmeasures. Following this
These reflection exercises included specific tech-
registration, participants completed all survey
niques that cued participants to focus on past
measures for Time 1 and were then randomly as-
thoughts, emotions, and behaviors. In addition, the
signed to either a 45-minute positive PsyCap inter-
vention (treatment group) or a decision-making ex- exercises cued their intentions for future steps and
ercise that included the same time duration and actions to take during these challenging situa-
multimedia techniques (control group). All aspects tions. Upon completion of these written reflection
of the intervention were completed on-line, that is, exercises, the Flash presentation was resumed,
data collection, delivery, and content of both the and the facilitator concluded with a summary that
treatment and control conditions. One week after included the PsyCap components’ definitions, a
completion of the first training session, all partic- reminder of what was learned, and how to apply
ipants (both treatment and control groups) were what was learned about these positive capacities
sent a final URL, which took them to the second to their jobs by using the same techniques that
45-minute session. Three days after the second ses- they had just practiced in the exercises. The intent
sion, the final PsyCap survey (Time 2) was admin- of this conclusion was to facilitate the transfer of
istered on-line to both treatment and control the training to the participants’ jobs.
groups. The second session for the treatment group em-
The implementation of the intervention for the phasized the development of hope and optimism.
treatment group included two on-line sessions As Snyder (2000) argues that people are inherently
each beginning after participants logged onto the task or goal oriented, or always trying to accom-
website. In the first session, the facilitator (one of plish something, considering personal goals was
the researchers used for all sessions in both the the starting point for session two. In a narrated
treatment and control conditions) focused on the Flash presentation, the same facilitator discussed
introduction of the positive capacities of resilience the importance of personal values, the realistic
and efficacy. This video presentation included def- challenge of accomplishing tasks and goals, and
initions coupled with a general explanation of how then directed participants to write down several
each capacity is applicable in the workplace in tasks they would like to accomplish that were re-
general and their job in particular. The web-based alistically challenging, applicable to the work-
delivery format was a narrated PowerPoint presen- place, and personally valuable. Again drawing
tation embedded in Flash animation. This Flash from Snyder’s (2000) work on hope development,
technology provided a medium for creating and the facilitator used, and indicated to the partici-
presenting the basic information in videolike for- pants, the term goal to mean an objective, task, or
mat. In addition, flash files were embedded within something an individual wants to accomplish. Af-
the presentation. These files allowed participants ter discussion and examples of what constitutes a
to view short video clips from popular movies that realistically challenging goal and how to deter-
the facilitator used as examples of resilience and mine if the goal was personally valuable, partici-
efficacy in dramatized settings. pants chose one of the several goals they had
The final phase of the first session was used for previously listed as the framework for the remain-
participants to consider personal work-related sit- der of this second session.
uations in their organizations. Specifically, partic- It is important to note that the adjectives of “re-
ipants were asked to consider challenging work alistically challenging” and “personally valuable”
situations for which they felt “stuck” or “in a bind” in terms of goals are quite subjective. A methodol-
in terms of resilient processes, resilience thinking, ogy or manipulation check to ensure goals were
and efficacious thoughts and behavior. For exam- framed in this manner was not possible here. How-
ple, participants were asked to write down what ever, the facilitator made a very deliberate effort to
circumstances at work were within or outside of provide a clear discussion of these goal character-
their direct control. Next, participants were asked istics and many examples were given. As impor-
to list a series of actions they could take based on tant, Snyder (2000) has demonstrated in his clinical
those circumstances that were within their direct work that framing goals as both personally valu-
control. This process allowed participants to cre- able and realistically challenging increases the2008 Luthans, Avey, and Patera 215
motivating agentic capacity of individuals, that is, session provided feedback of what others had
the “will power” component of hope. done and why on this exercise. Based on this feed-
The facilitator then directed the participants to back, the participants were then allowed to reflect
take the goals that were realistically challenging and change their choices. After completion of this
and break them down into smaller goals. This is exercise, the facilitator provided the control partic-
what Snyder (2000) refers to as “stepping.” This ipants suggested solutions and discussed the im-
process of dividing large goals into smaller more plications the exercise had for effective decision
manageable ones was also designed to increase making.
the agentic capacity of hope. The participant could
see that the overarching goal was more attainable
PsyCap Measure
through small “subgoals,” which in turn affects the
willpower dimension of hope. The idea here was Psychological capital was measured both pre- and
that as goals appear to be more attainable, gen- postintervention using the 24-item PsyCap ques-
eral expectations of success in the applicable area tionnaire (PCQ; Luthans, Avolio et al., 2007;
(the participant’s area of responsibility) are in- Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007). The items used in
creased, thus influencing participant’s levels of this PCQ were originally drawn from published
optimism and hope, but also their self-efficacy. validated scales commonly used in positive psy-
Most directly, however, optimism was targeted in chology. These individual scales have also been
this technique as participants practiced identify- used in previous studies in the workplace (e.g.,
ing positive outcomes and successful activities Peterson & Luthans, 2003, Luthans et al., 2005;
that would lead to personal goal attainment. The Youssef & Luthans, 2007). Six items in this PCQ
increased positive expectations about those out- represented each of the four components that make
comes were intended to contribute to developing up PsyCap. These items were adapted for the
optimism for achieving success. In addition, when workplace from the following standard scales: (1.)
participants practice developing strategies to at- Hope (Snyder et al., 1996); (2.) Resilience (Wagnild
tain personal goals, negative expectations may be & Young, 1993); (3.) Optimism (Scheier & Carver,
reduced, and thus, positively influence optimism. 1985); and (4.) Efficacy (Parker, 1998).
The goal of this second session was for each The entire 24-item PCQ is published in Luthans,
participant to have attained some degree of task Youssef, and Avolio (2007: 237–238). Some sample
mastery (efficacy building) through identification items for each subscale include the following: “I
of a personally valuable goal then parceling this feel confident helping to set targets/goals in my
goal into more manageable subgoals. The path- work area” (efficacy); “If I should find myself in a
ways component of hope was influenced by the jam at work, I could think of many ways to get out
identification and generation of multiple path- of it” (hope); “I always look on the bright side of
ways to accomplish the same goal, as well as things regarding my job” (optimism); and “I usu-
creating contingency plans for overcoming poten- ally manage difficulties one way or another at
tial obstacles and problems. work” (resiliency). To emphasize the “state-like”
The overall objective of this web-based interven- nature of the measure, the participants were asked
tion consisting of the two sessions focused on an to respond by describing “how you may think
integrated developmental strategy for all four about yourself right now.” Then all responses for
PsyCap state-like capacities in an effort to en- the PCQ were anchored on a 6-point Likert scale:
hance the overall PsyCap of participants in the 1 ⫽ strongly disagree, 2 ⫽ disagree, 3 ⫽ somewhat
treatment group. The intervention consisted of dis- disagree, 4 ⫽ somewhat agree, 5 ⫽ agree, and 6 ⫽
tinct, yet in many ways similar, sessions for overall strongly agree. Each PsyCap component demon-
PsyCap development. strated acceptable reliability in this study (effi-
The control group, on the other hand, received an cacy ⫽ .92, hope ⫽ .87, resilience ⫽ .83, optimism ⫽
alternate, very different— but still relevant to lead- .77), as well as overall PsyCap (.93).
ership and human resource development— deci- Although acceptable psychometric properties
sion-making exercise. After the control partici- and support for the construct validity of this PCQ
pants, who were blind to their condition, linked to have been demonstrated (see Luthans, Avolio et
a website, the same facilitator used similar proce- al., 2007), because it is a relatively recent scale,
dures as the treatment training intervention to take confirmatory factor analysis of the PCQ consider-
them through the decision exercise using Flash ing PsyCap as a second-order factor was con-
animation on video. The facilitator emphasized the ducted in the present study as well. The 6 items
importance of reflection and thinking through were set for each component to load on their re-
choices in the first session and then in the second spective component. Each of the four components216 Academy of Management Learning & Education June
was then set to load on to the PsyCap factor. All of TABLE 2
the item loadings were significant (p ⬍ .01) on their Means, ANOVA, Effect Sizes, and Confidence
respective latent factor as well as each component Intervals for PsyCap
loading on the second-order factor PsyCap. Results
Treatment Control
of the CFA were as follows: SRMR ⫽ .048, RMSEA ⫽
.054, CFI ⫽ .958. Based on Hu and Bentler’s (1999) Mean Time 1 (SD) 4.58 (.610)a 4.69 (.591)
recommendations of SRMR ⬍ .08, RMSEA ⬍ .06 and Mean Time 2 (SD) 4.70 (.643) 4.64 (.605)
CFI ⬎ .95, results from the CFA suggest strong fit p value .016 .061
for the second-order factor model. Overall, the CFA Effect Size d .191 ⫺.042
Effect Size r .095 ⫺.083
results support that the four PsyCap components
95% CI ⫹/⫺.084 (.035 – .204) ⫹/⫺.058 (⫺.003 – .114)
do represent an underlying latent, core construct of
overall PsyCap. a
The group means from the treatment group in Table 1 are
slightly different than Table 2 given mortality from Time 1 to
Time 2.
RESULTS
The results of the study are shown in Table 1. a more rigorous test of mean differences. Specifi-
Given the focus of the analysis on mean differ- cally, PsyCap data at Time 2 were compared be-
ences within the treatment and control groups, tween the treatment and control conditions, con-
ANOVA and ANCOVA were determined to be the trolling for PsyCap at Time 1. The analyses
appropriate statistical techniques. In addition to focused on the difference between the two groups
ANOVA and ANCOVA, we calculated confidence as a result of group (treatment or control) assign-
intervals, effects sizes, and binomial effect size ment, controlling for any effects of the previous
displays (BESD). Although random assignment to PsyCap scores. In addition to controlling for the
treatment and control groups promotes initial effect of PsyCap at Time 1, we also included the
equivalence between the groups, before conduct- covariates of age, gender, job level, ethnicity, and
ing the analyses, initial equivalence was deter- education. Results shown in Table 3 suggest that
mined by an ANOVA between the levels of PsyCap the group variable (treatment or control conditions)
of the treatment and control groups. Based on a was a significant predictor of PsyCap at Time 2
nonsignificant result (p ⫽ .256), we concluded ran- (p ⬍ .001), whereas age, gender, job level, ethnicity,
dom assignment was indeed effective in establish- and education were not (p ⬎ .05).
ing initial equivalence between the two groups, as Binomial effect size display (BESD; Rosenthal &
no significant differences were found between Rubin, 1982) is a practical method that demon-
their levels of PsyCap. strates the anticipated utility of a given develop-
Effect sizes were also calculated for the mean mental intervention and uses the effect size r in its
differences observed between treatment and con- calculation. This statistic is useful because “com-
trol groups. Specifically, as shown in Table 2, the puting a BESD to show just how much of a differ-
effect size for the difference from Time 1 to Time 2 ence we make by applying the knowledge we pro-
for the treatment group was d ⫽ .191 (r ⫽ .095). The duce can relieve feelings of importance that are
effect size for the difference from Time 1 to Time 2 likely to be aroused by effect sizes expressed in
for the control group was d ⫽ ⫺.042 (r ⫽ ⫺.084). In terms of the proportion of variance explained”
addition to ANOVA, we conducted an ANCOVA for (Eden, 2002: 845). The BESD provides the researcher
with a range of values that highlight the antici-
TABLE 1
ANOVAs to Validate Initial Equivalence Between TABLE 3
Treatment and Control Conditions ANCOVA Controlling for PsyCap at Time 1,
Demographic and Job Variables
Treatment Control
Source M M F test p value Variables F value p value
PsyCap at Time 1 4.61 4.69 0.738 .391 PsyCap at Time 1 605.958 .000
Age 32.18 32.85 0.043 .836 Age 1.029 .312
Gender 1.48 1.50 0.093 .761 Ethnicity .691 .407
Job Level 1.96 1.87 0.364 .547 Job Level .495 .482
Ethnicitya 1.06 1.07 0.024 .877 Education .146 .703
Education 2.58 2.50 0.773 .380 Gender .735 .392
Randomly Assigned Group 6.551 .011
a
Given the majority of participants were Caucasian, ethnic- (Treatment or Control)
ity was dummy coded Caucasian (1) and non-Caucasian (2).2008 Luthans, Avey, and Patera 217
pated success rate of the developmental interven- analyses here builds on previous research support
tion for those participants in the treatment group for a second-order, core construct of PsyCap indi-
by calculating one half of the treatment effect size cated by self-efficacy, hope, resilience, and opti-
added to .5 for the treatment group and subtracted mism.
it from .5 for the control group. A notable strength in the internal validity of this
Given that each participant was randomly as- study was the random assignment of participants
signed to either the treatment or control group, it into treatment and control groups. The major ben-
would be expected that participants in both the efit of random assignment is that it assumes initial
treatment and control groups have an equal equivalence on all potentially confounding vari-
chance of increasing their PsyCap apart from the ables in the study, and analysis of the Time 1
intervention (e.g., day-to-day life or work events). levels of PsyCap showed no significant difference
This equal chance of success, apart from the inter- between experimental and control groups. In terms
vention, is an assumption when calculating BESD. of external validity, the heterogeneous nature of
The observed treatment effect size was r ⫽ .095. the sample provides support for generalizing the
Applying the formula for BESD, the display range results. Specifically, the effects for a web-based
was .452 to .548. The implication of this BESD range PsyCap intervention may not be limited to one
is that participants without this PsyCap interven- particular organization, industry, or demographic
tion will score above average on the PsyCap in- group, as multiple organizations, industries, and
strument 45.2% of the time, whereas participants demographics were represented within the study
receiving the intervention will score above aver- sample. However, although the study utilized ran-
age on the PsyCap instrument 54.8% of the time. dom assignment to conditions, it was not possible
to generate random selection of participants.
Therefore, even though the participants for the
DISCUSSION
study came from a wide variety of organizations,
The purpose of this study was to determine job levels, and types, they could be a unique sub-
whether a short web-based training intervention set of the population and thus this could be a
could be effective in human resource development threat to the external validity of the study find-
of PsyCap. Specifically, our research question was ings. Overall, given the strengths of the pretest,
whether a training intervention focused on effi- posttest control group design and the diverse cross-
cacy, hope, optimism, and resilience as indicators sectional sample, the results can generally rule
of a second-order, core factor of PsyCap could be out alternative explanations. Yet, some potential
effectively developed in a 2-hour on-line training limitations still need to be noted.
intervention. Through a pretest, posttest control
group experimental design, the treatment group
Limitations
did experience a significant increase in their
PsyCap, while the randomly assigned control As opposed to the internal and external validity
group that went through a different, but relevant threats to the study findings, most of the potential
intervention, did not show a significant increase in limitations are concerned with the web-based in-
their PsyCap. In addition, results of the ANCOVA tervention. First, this study did not compare this
demonstrated that the PsyCap intervention posi- web-based intervention to a typical face-to-face
tively developed PsyCap, as the group variable classroom or training intervention. Thus, we can
predicted PsyCap at Time 2 while controlling for not say nor do we intend to imply that this web-
pre-PsyCap scores, demographics, and job level. based training intervention works as well, better,
Overall, the results of this experimental study pro- or worse than a face-to-face intervention in devel-
vide at least initial support that the psychological oping PsyCap. The results simply suggest that
capital of a broad cross-section of organizational web-based delivery for the PsyCap intervention
participants can be developed through a short may be effective. However, when considering web-
web-based training intervention. based versus traditional face-to-face training in-
Beyond this beginning support for the effective- terventions, the Sitzmann et al. (2006) meta-analy-
ness of this type of an approach to human resource sis noted in the introductory discussion did find
development of PsyCap, the study also provides that web-based approaches such as used in this
additional evidence of PsyCap being a higher or- study may be as, or even more, effective than tra-
der, core construct. Building on previous work in ditional face-to-face delivery of an intervention.
psychological resource, core self-evaluation, and However, from a pedagogical standpoint, future
broaden-and-build theories in positive psychology research comparing face-to-face with web-based
and organizational behavior, confirmatory factor delivery of PsyCap training would be beneficial.218 Academy of Management Learning & Education June
Another potential limitation was that the study Implications
design did not permit individual components in
Our results here have some practical implications
the development process to be measured and as-
not only for developing PsyCap per se, but also for
sessed. Thus, it is possible that some components
leadership and human resource development.
of the training worked better than others. A related
They suggest that web-based developmental inter-
limitation is that specific facets of PsyCap were ventions focused on participants’ hope, efficacy,
not provided separate programs. For example, lit- optimism, resilience, and overall PsyCap may be
erature on goal setting supports the idea that more accomplished in a relatively inexpensive and con-
challenging goals may increase self-efficacy venient, yet effective, manner. And once again,
(Locke & Latham, 1990). Given it was not possible given the recent research showing a positive rela-
in this study design to obtain multiple measures of tionship between PsyCap and performance, a
PsyCap taken at multiple time points throughout PsyCap development intervention may be able to
the intervention, overall PsyCap development may influence performance and other desired out-
have been related to goal-setting effects through comes.
increased self-efficacy. Besides the implications surrounding PsyCap
Still another limitation is that the only outcome development is the potential advantageous role
variable in this study was PsyCap. While previous that information technology may play in leader-
research has demonstrated a positive relationship ship and human resource development. As com-
between PsyCap and important outcomes such as puters and the Internet have become key tools for
performance (e.g., Luthans, Avey et al., 2008; research and practice in the field of psychology
Luthans, Avolio et al., 2007; Luthans et al., 2005; (e.g., see Barak, 1999; Jerome, DeLeon, James,
Luthans, Norman et al., 2008), satisfaction and/or Folen, Earles, & Gedney, 2000), this study’s results
commitment (Larson & Luthans, 2006; Luthans, help contribute to the growing case for the use of
Avolio et al., 2007; Luthans, Norman et al., 2008), this technology in leadership and human resource
and absenteeism (Avey et al., 2006), the specific development. For example, the virtual context for
learning, behaviors, or outcomes were not ob- this intervention indicates that this type of technol-
tained from this specific study. Thus, the effect of ogy may be used to deliver development and train-
this web-based PsyCap training intervention study ing across the globe simultaneously or sequen-
results can not be extended beyond developing tially. Given that we are now in a “flat world”
PsyCap. (Friedman, 2005) global environment where virtual
In terms of limitations to the actual value of teams and multinational corporations are the
implementing such PsyCap training, although the norm, the need for virtual training can be expected
BESD results provide support for the potential util- to increase and perhaps, as Seligman and col-
ity for increasing participant PsyCap, it cannot leagues (2005) have noted for positive psychology,
substitute for a cost– benefit analysis. While the be the legacy of applying positive organizational
study results do provide at least initial support behavior interventions.
that the intervention was able to increase PsyCap, In addition to the implications for leadership
and previous research does support that PsyCap is and human resource development, web-based ap-
related to performance outcomes, a cost– benefit plications to medical care— especially to remote
analysis would need to be calculated to determine parts of the world (i.e., telemedicine)—and web-
the appropriateness of the intervention in a spe- based interventions for both psychological and be-
cific context. This may also be considered as return havioral clinical treatments are being increasingly
on development (ROD) for the PsyCap intervention. recognized and implemented (Ritterband et al.,
Utility analysis has demonstrated such an ROD for 2003). We propose that such technological innova-
PsyCap (e.g., see Luthans, Avey et al., 2006; tions will escalate and be made even more user-
Luthans, Youssef, & Avolio, 2007). friendly. The use of web-based interventions will
Each limitation provides areas for future re- continue to gain in popularity not only in global
search. For example, intervention designs may business, academic, medical, and clinical applica-
seek to target one or more facets of PsyCap in an tions, but also in the training and development
effort to identify if one component can be more efforts in today’s and especially future workplaces.
easily developed than others. Future researchers
may also seek to examine more detailed planned
CONCLUSION
comparisons by having differing lengths of train-
ing, forms of interface, and types of technology, The recent wave of negative publicity stemming
such as Flash animation. from corporate and geopolitical problems high-2008 Luthans, Avey, and Patera 219
lights the seeming need for more positivity in the Bryant, F. B., & Cvengros, J. A. 2004. Distinguishing hope and
optimism. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23:
world and the result has been a re-emphasis, not a
273–302.
new discovery, in the use of a positive lens for
organizational behavior theory, research, and Cameron, K. S., & Caza, A. 2004. Contributions to the discipline
of positive organizational scholarship. American Behav-
practice. Positive psychological resources such as ioral Scientist, 47: 731–739.
hope or resilience, once thought to be reserved for
Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., & Quinn, R. (Eds.). 2003. Positive
“gifted” individuals (Garmezy, 1974), now have em- organizational scholarship. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
pirical support that they can be developed (Masten
Carifio, J., & Rhodes, L. 2002. Construct validities and the em-
& Reed, 2002; Snyder, 2000). The same is true of pirical relationships between optimism, hope, self-efficacy,
more commonly recognized capacities in the field and locus of control. Work, 19: 125–136.
of organizational behavior, such as efficacy (Ban- Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. S. 2002. Optimism. In C. R. Snyder &
dura, 1997; Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998) and optimism S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology: 231–243.
(Seligman, 1998). This study has taken the next step Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
by empirically demonstrating that these positive Clark, R. E. 1983. Reconsidering research on media. Review of
capacities in the form of a second-order, core con- Educational Research, 53: 445– 449.
struct of psychological capital can be developed Clark, R. E. 1994. Media will never influence learning. Educa-
through a short web-based training intervention. tional Technology Research and Development, 42: 21–29.
The investment and development in psychological Eden, D. 2002. Replication, meta-analysis, scientific progress
capital may not only have the potential to provide and AMJ’s publication policy. Academy of Management
competitive advantage for organizations now and, Journal, 45: 841– 846.
especially, in the future, but also, through web- Fredrickson, B. L. 2001. The role of positive emotions in positive
based delivery, an inexpensive, practical, and po- psychology: The broaden and build theory of positive emo-
tentially effective means to deliver such develop- tions. American Psychologist, 56: 218 –226.
ment. Fredrickson, B. L., & Joiner, T. 2002. Positive emotions trigger
upward spirals toward emotional well-being. Psychologi-
cal Science, 13: 172–175.
REFERENCES Friedman, T. L. 2005. The world is flat. New York: Farrar, Straus
Avey, J. B., Patera, J. L., & West, B. J. 2006. Positive psychological and Giroux.
capital: A new lens to view absenteeism. Journal of Lead- Garmezy, N. 1974. The study of competence in children at risk for
ership and Organizational Studies, 13: 42– 60. severe psychopathology. In E. J. Anthony & C. Koupernik
Avey, J. B., Wernsing, T. S., & Luthans, F. 2008. Can positive (Eds.), The child in his family: Vol 3. Children at psychiatric
employees help positive organization change? Impact of risk: 77–97. New York: Wiley.
psychological capital and emotions on relevant attitudes Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. 2004.
and behaviors. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 44: Should we trust web-based studies? American Psycholo-
48 –70. gist, 59: 93–104.
Avolio, B. J., Bass, B., & Jung, D. 1999. Re-examining the compo- Hobfoll, S. 2002. Social and psychological resources and adap-
nents of transformational and transaction using the multi- tation. Review of General Psychology, 6: 307–324.
factor leadership questionnaire. Journal of Occupational
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. 1999. Cutoff criteria for fit indices in
and Organizational Psychology, 72: 441– 462.
covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus
Bandura, A. 1986. Social foundations of thought and action. new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 61: 1–55.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Prentice Hall.
Jerome, L. W., DeLeon, P. H., James, L. C., Folen, R., Earles, J., &
Bandura, A. 1997. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New Gedney, J. J. 2000. The coming of age in telecommunications
York: Freeman. in psychological research and practice. American Psychol-
Barak A. 1999. Psychological applications on the Internet: A ogist, 55: 407– 421.
discipline on the threshold of a new millennium. Applied Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. 2001. Relationship of core self-evalu-
and Preventive Psychology, 8: 231–246. ation traits—self-esteem, generalized self efficacy, locus of
Beck, A. T. 1967. Depression: Clinical, experimental and theoret- control, and emotional stability—with job-satisfaction and
ical aspects. New York: Harper and Row. performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychol-
ogy, 86: 80 –92.
Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Lou, Y., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A.,
Larson, M., & Luthans, F. 2006. The potential added value of
Wozney, L., Wallet, P. A., Fiset, M., & Huang, B. 2004. How
psychological capital in predicting work attitudes. Journal
does distance education compare with classroom instruc-
of Leadership and Organization Studies, 13: 44 – 61.
tion? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of
Educational Research, 74: 349 –361. Law, K. S., Wong, C., & Mobley, W. H. 1998. Toward a taxonomy
of multidimensional constructs. Academy of Management
Block, J., & Kremen, A. M. 1996. IQ and ego-resiliency: Concep-
Review, 23: 741–755.
tual and empirical connections and separateness. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 70: 349 –361. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. 1990. A theory of goal setting and
task performance. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice–Hall.
Bonanno, G. A. 2005. Clarifying and extending the construct of
adult resilience. American Psychologist, 60: 265–267. Luthans, F. 2002a. The need for and meaning of positive orga-220 Academy of Management Learning & Education June
nizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23: man resource management. Research in Personnel and Hu-
695–706. man Resources Management, 13: 153–200.
Luthans, F. 2002b. Positive organizational behavior: Developing Nelson, D., & Cooper, C. L. (Eds.). 2007. Positive organizational
and managing psychological strengths. Academy of Man- behavior. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
agement Executive, 16: 57–72. Parker, S. 1998. Enhancing role-breadth self efficacy: The roles
Luthans, F., Avey, J. B., Avolio, B. J., Norman, S. M., & Combs, G. J. of job enrichment and other organizational interventions.
2006. Psychological capital development: Toward a micro- Journal of Applied Psychology, 83: 835– 852.
intervention. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27: 387– Peterson, C. 2006. A primer in positive psychology. New York:
393. Oxford University Press.
Luthans, F., Avey, J. B., Clapp-Smith, R., & Li, W. 2008. More Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. 2004. Character strengths and
evidence on the value of Chinese workers’ psychological virtues: A handbook and classification. New York: Oxford
capital: A potentially unlimited competitive resource? The University Press.
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19:
818 – 827. Peterson, S. J., & Luthans, F. 2003. The positive impact and
development of hopeful leaders. Leadership and Organiza-
Luthans, F., & Avolio, B. J. 2008. The ’point’ of positive organiza- tion Development Journal, 24: 26 –31.
tional behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, in
press. Ritterband, L. M., Gonder-Frederick, L. A., Cox, D. C., Clifton,
A. D., West, R. W., & Borowitz, S. M. 2003. Internet interven-
Luthans, F., & Avolio, B. J., Avey, J. B., & Norman, S. M. 2007. tions: In review, in use, and into the future. Professional-
Psychological capital: Measurement and relationship with Psychology: Research and Practice, 34: 527–534.
performance and satisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 60:
541–572. Roberts, L. M. 2006. Shifting the lens on organizational life: The
added value of positive scholarship. Academy of Manage-
Luthans, F., Avolio, B., Walumbwa, F., & Li, W. 2005. The psy- ment Review, 31: 292–305.
chological capital of Chinese workers: Exploring the rela-
tionship with performance. Management and Organization Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. 1982. A simple, general purpose
Review, 1: 247–269. display of magnitude of experimental effect. Journal of Ed-
ucational Psychology, 74: 166 –169.
Luthans, F., Luthans, K., & Luthans, B. 2004. Positive psycholog-
Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. 1985. Optimism, coping, and
ical capital: Going beyond human and social capital. Busi-
health: Assessment and implications of generalized out-
ness Horizons, 47: 45–50.
come expectancies. Health Psychology, 4: 219 –247.
Luthans, F., Norman, S. M., Avolio, B. J., & Avey, J. B. 2008. The
Schoon, I. 2006. Risk and resilience: Adaptations in changing
mediating role of psychological capital in the supportive
times. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
organizational climate - employee performance relation-
ship. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29: 219 –238. Seligman, M. E. P. 1998. Learned optimism. New York: Pocket
Books.
Luthans, F., Vogelgesang, G. R., & Lester, P. B. 2006. Developing
the psychological capital of resiliency. Human Resource Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. 2000. Positive psy-
Development Review, 5: 25– 44. chology. American Psychologist, 55: 5–14.
Luthans, F., & Youssef, C. M. 2004. Human, social, and now Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. 2005.
positive psychological capital management: Investing in Positive psychology progress: Empirical validation of inter-
people for competitive advantage. Organizational Dynam- ventions. American Psychologist, 60: 410 – 421
ics, 33: 143–160. Sitzmann, T., Kraiger, K., Stewart, D., & Wisher, R. 2006. The
Luthans, F., & Youssef, C. M. 2007. Emerging positive organiza- comparative effectiveness of web-based and classroom in-
tional behavior. Journal of Management, 33: 321–349. struction: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology: 59, 623–
664.
Luthans, F., Youssef, C. M., & Avolio, B. J. 2007. Psychological
capital: Developing the human competitive edge. Oxford, Snyder, C. R. 2000. Handbook of hope. San Diego, CA: Academic
UK: Oxford University Press. Press.
Magaletta, P. R., & Oliver, J. M. 1999. The hope construct, will Snyder, C. R. 1994. Hope and optimism. Encyclopedia of human
and ways: Their relations with self-efficacy, optimism, and behavior: 535–542. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
well being. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 55: 539 –551. Snyder, C. R. 2002. Hope theory: Rainbows in the mind. Psycho-
Masten, A. S. 2001. Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in logical Inquiry, 13: 249 –276.
development. American Psychologist, 56: 227–239. Snyder, C. R., Harris, C., Anderson, J. R., Holleran, S. A., Irving,
Masten, A. S., Garmenzy, N., Tellegen, A., Pellegrini, D. S., Lar- L. M., Sigmon, S. T., Yoshinobu, L., Gibb, J., Langelle, C., &
kin, K., & Larsen, A. 1985. Competence and stress in school Harney, P. 1991. The will and the ways: Development and
children: The moderating effects of individual and family validation of an individual-differences measure of hope.
qualities. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 29: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60: 570 –585.
745–764. Snyder, C. R., Irving, L., & Anderson, J. 1991. Hope and health. In
Masten, A. S., & Reed, M. G. J. 2002. Resilience in development. C.R. Snyder & D.R. Forsyth (Eds.), Handbook of social and
In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive clinical psychology: 285–305. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon.
psychology: 74 – 88. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Snyder, C. R., & Lopez, S. (Eds.). 2002. Handbook of positive
psychology. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Mount, M. K., & Barrick, M. R. 1995. The Big Five personality
dimensions: Implications for research and practice in hu- Snyder, C. R., Rand, K. L., & Sigmon, D. R. 2002. Hope theory. InYou can also read
