View
221
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
The Influence of Dispositional Optimism and Pessimism on Task Engagement
for Spatial and Temporal Discrimination
J.L. Szalma, J.M. Ross, & P.A. HancockUniversity of Central Florida
Trinity of StressStress Signature(Deterministic)
Compensatory Processes(Nomothetic)
Goal-Directed Behavior
(Idiographic)
Hancock & Warm (1989)
Maximal
Minimal
Hypostress
PS
YC
HO
LOG
ICA
L A
DA
PTA
BIL
ITY
NO
RM
AT
IVE
ZO
NE
Dynamic Instability
Hyperstress
(AT
TE
NT
ION
AL
RE
SO
UR
CE
CA
PA
CIT
Y)
Physiological Zone of Maximal Adaptability
Psychological Zone of Maximal Adaptability
Maximal
Minimal
Dynamic Instability
PH
YS
IOL
OG
ICA
L A
DA
PTA
BIL
ITY
COMFORT ZONE
STRESS LEVEL
Maximal Adaptability Model
Hancock and Warm (1989)
• Recognition of task as a proximal stressor • Two fundamental task dimensions.
– Information structure – often expressed spatially.– Information rate – the temporal characteristics of
the task.
Hancock & Warm (1989)
Distortion of Space-Time Under Stress
StressPerceived Time
Sidereal Time
Hancock & Weaver (in press)
What is the Common Mechanism?
• One Possibility: Common Resource Capacity
• Narrowing occurs as a result of diminishing resources
Role of Individual Differences
Individual Differences in Stress Response
Goal-Directed Behavior
(Idiographic)
Dispositional Optimimsm/Pessimism
Performance Impairment in Pessimistic Swimmers (Seligman, Nolen-Hoeksema, Thornton, & Thornton, 1990)
Pessimistic candidates do more poorly in elections (Zullow, 1995)
Insurance agent productivity (Seligman & Schulman, 1986)
Pessimism and AttentionPerformance impairment (sometimes; Helton, Dember, Warm, &
Matthews, 1999)
Increased Stress Symptoms (Helton et al., 1999; Szalma, 2002)
Maladaptive coping strategies (Scheier & Carver, 1987; Szalma, 2002)
Effects may depend on task characteristics (Thropp, Szalma, Ross & Hancock, 2003)
Relation of Pessimism to stress and performance in attention is generally stronger than that associated with optimism (when measured as distinct constructs)
Traits and Resource Sharing
Hypotheses
1. Individuals high in pessimism (low on optimism) would exhibit greater stress symptoms than those low in pessimism (high in optimism)
2. These effects should be greater under more demanding task conditions: combination of spatial and temporal characteristics
3. Trait effects should be greater when an external stressor is applied (white noise)
Experimental Procedure
• Participants– 46 Undergraduates (23 Males, 23 Females)
• 2 (noise) by 3 (task) mixed design with repeated measures on the second factor.
Experimental Procedure
• Noise: 85 dBA intermittent white noise
• Conjunctive DiscriminationTasks:
– Spatial Dominant: Spatial + Luminance discrimination
– Temporal Dominant: Temporal + Luminance discrimination
– Combined: Spatial + Temporal discrimination
OPIPre-
DSSQPost-DSSQ
Post-DSSQ
Post-DSSQ
Instructions Task 1 Task 2 Task 3
• Optimism/Pessimism Inventory (OPI): Pessimism/Optimism measured as partially independent constructs (Dember, Martin, Hummer, Howe, & Melton, 1989)
Pre-DSSQ: -Pre-Task Engagement, Pre-Task Worry, Pre-Task Distress
Post-DSSQ: -Post-task Engagement, Post-task Worry, Post-task Distress
-Task-focused, Emotion-focused, Avoidant Coping
Start End
Questionnaires and Procedure
Spatial-Dominant Task Stimulus
TARGET
Temporal-Dominant Task Stimulus
TARGET
Combined Task Stimulus
TARGET
Results: Performance
• Optimism and pessimism did not predict performance (Hits, FA, d’, c)
• Neither trait interacted with noise to influence performance or stress
Results: Pessimism and Stress
• Pessimism predicted greater post-task Distress, but only in the spatial-dominant condition (R2 = .11, p<.05)
• This effect was not significant when the pre-state was entered first into the regression (∆R2 = .01, p>.05)
Optimism and Distress
• Optimism predicted less post-task Distress in all three tasks (R2 = .08 --.11, p<.05 in each case)
• These effects were not significant when the pre-state was entered first into the regression (∆R2 < .01, p>.05)
Optimism and Task Engagement: Spatial-Dominant Task
• Optimism did not predict changes in post Task Engagement in tasks with a spatial component, (R2 <.02, p>.05 in each case)
• In the spatial task, optimism predicted greater post Task Engagement after the pre-state was entered first (R2 =.35; ∆R2 = .08, p<.05)
Optimism and Task Engagement: Temporal-Dominant Task
• Optimism predicted decreased post Task Engagement in the temporal-dominant task (R2 =.09, p<.05)
• This effect was not significant when the pre-task state was entered first (∆R2 <.01, p>.05)
Post-Task Engagement as a Function of Optimism
TE = -0.05Opt + 2.44R2 = 0.09
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72
Optimism
Po
st-t
ask
En
ga
ge
men
tSpatial-Dominant Task
Optimism and Worry
• Optimism predicted increased post task Worry, but only in the temporal-dominant task (R2 =.1, p<.05)
• This effect was not significant when the pre-task state was entered first (∆R2 =.04, p=.07)
Conclusions
• Optimism may exert a greater influence on stress response than previous experiments indicated
• This effect is task dependent• Effects vary across dimensions of stress-state• White noise did not interact with either trait• Effects of optimism/pessimism on stress state
was not exacerbated by the combination of spatial/temporal demands
• The stress-trait relation varied depending on task dimension emphasized (spatial, temporal)
Acknowledgement
This research was supported by a Multidisciplinary University Research Initiative (MURI) program grant from the Army Research Office, Dr. Elmar Schmeisser, Technical Monitor (Grant# DAAD19-01-1-0621). The research was facilitated by a DARPA-funded program under Grant NBCH1030012, CMDR Dylan Schmorrow, Technical Monitor. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the US Government.
Recommended