Toward a positive psychology of coping with anticipated events.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many people appear to be quite resilient to significant stress suggesting that they may possess an orientation to events and life that is resistant to such threats. We propose that one significant aspect of this orientation is tendency to view adversities as something that can happen to anyone and is reflected in tendency of people entering uncertain contexts to prepare by imagining a range of possible outcomes, both desired and undesired. This preparatory work facilitates immediate implementation of effective problem solving and support seeking strategies should desired outcome seem in doubt. We refer to this orientation as realistic orientation and review evidence suggesting that such an orientation is associated with realistic ? but not unrealistic ? optimism and smooth adaptation to adversity. Keywords: proactive coping, realistic orientation, optimism Research on psychological dimensions of human stress has been rooted historically in clinical psychology, where, understandably, concern has been with alleviating distress and faciUtating adaptation (SeUgman & Csikzszentmihalyi, 2000). Presented with clients suffering from debilitating grief, depression, anxiety, chronic pain, and a variety of other distressing conditions with psychological aspects, psychologists' attention focused on ways to understand stress and coping, and how they might help alleviate distress they saw in their clients. Psychologists' attempts to understand what it means to adapt were therefore based on experiences of those who were seeking help. As has been noted, such an understanding may lead to a view of coping and adjustment that does not apply outside of help-seeking or clinical domain (e.g., Taylor & Brown, 1988). As research turned to understanding how people who do not seek treatment adjust to adversity and grow, a positive psychology of human adaptation was born. Positive psychology represents a branch of psychological science concerned with understanding development of well-being, virtue, and resilience. Our perspective is that well-being, virtue, and resilience are achieved by complex strivings that are not attributable merely to being optimistic, focusing on positive, and expressing positive emotions. Rather, well-being, virtue and resilience come by a variety of means, some of which include thoughtful reflection on a wide range of positive and negative personal experiences (past and present), by pursuing intrinsically meaningful and challenging goals, and by developing a realistic understanding of oneself (one's abiUties, strengths, weaknesses) and context or environment in which one finds oneself (Colvin & Block, 1994). This is not to say that optimism, focusing on positive, and expressing positive emotions are not involved in development of well-being, virtue, and r?sinent outcomes, but rather that they do not tell whole story. Thusly, our notion of positive psychology does not ignore or downplay negative thoughts, negative emotions, or doubts. Indeed, a number of studies suggest that active processing or contemplation of negative and threatening information plays an important role in health, well-being, and personal growth (e.g., Davis & Morgan, 2008; Niederhoffer & Pennebaker, 2009; Larsen, Hemenover, Norris, & Cacioppo, 2003). The focus of much of our work concerns processes by which everyday people appraise and respond to particular meanings engendered in major stressful events and situations (e.g., Davis & Morgan, 2008; Davis, Nolen-Hoeksema, & Larson, 1998; Davis, Wohl, & Verberg, 2007; Davis, Wortman, Lehman, & Silver, 2000). The death of one's spouse, for instance, carries many meanings (the loss of a soulmate, loss of shared memories, perhaps a loss of faith or hope, shattering of dreams), and each one of these meanings represents an issue that may need to be addressed in coping with the loss. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".