Hello - this is an interesting question, and it comes down to terminological and conceptual differences between the constructs.

Resilience is conceptualized as a return to anormal state of functioning, perhaps after a stressor or trauma; in other words, resilience represents a homeostatic rebounding to a prior level of functioning.

On the other hand, hopefulness, which is theoretically predicated on goal-setting perspectives, is comprised of the ability to identify meaningful goals and also problem-solve effectively enought to attain those goals.

Therefore - back to your question - it seems that hopefulness could be a potential mechanism whereby resilience is attained. For instance, in the case of frustration or a negative life event, if a person has hope (e.g., they can see a future goal and work toward its attainment), then they may be more likely to resume their nomral pre-stresor level of functioning.

Of course, as you suggest, bi-directionality may occur. An individual who is generally more resilient, or who has experienced a history of resilient recoveries, may be more likely to be hopeful as a result....

Hello, James, thank you for commentary. Especially interesting was your statement that (... in the case of frustration or a negative life event, if a persons has hope...) then they may be more likely to resume their nomal pre-stresor level of functioning, because this not seems very obvious as a direct implication of high hope, at least when it's defined as agency and pathways thinking.

This seems to be more expected when you define hope as positive expectation of the fulfillment of the desire or to achieve the desired effect in terms of uncertainty on the one hand and on the other - the confidence that it will happen. The same mechanism that are resoures for hoping could regulate adaptation in the face of a major stressor, may be in similar way.

I find your comment as very inspiring for my researching various mechanisms of hope, taking into accounts the cultural context.

James, could you explain your interesting assumption about the impact of hopefulness on the level of person functioning, that is the pre-stresor quality of response?

I haven't been keeping up with what happens in health psychology, but on these matters I always think of an article by Shelley Taylor from 1990. Its still very much worth reading. Bottom line: optimism and locus of control are the only concepts which have really proven to be relevant.

I might add that my dissertation (same year) about social support found a crucial role for locus of control as well, since it determines - even more than the presence of helping others - wether someone is able to profit from social support or not.

Consequently my hypothesis has been that the pivotal variable determining succes of almost any therapy or growth training is its ability to change locus of control-attitudes.

I forgot to mention that I doubt the usefulness of 'hope' as a concept. Hoping for a miracle or you'll solve your financial problems in the casino is quite something else than hoping you'll get a job after havind passed your exams with flying colors. In other words its at lest a two-dimensional concept, one dimension being optimism (assuming things will work out as can reasonably be expected, akin to the concept of "continuity" by Sarason) the other realism, or - better still - locus of control.

Hello to All - I agree that it is important to discern the effects of these assorted constructs, such as locus of control, optimism and hopefulness. Indeed, it is crucial for scientific clarity that we do so. Here's what the literature suggets: optimism = generalized expectancy for a "good" future;" hope = goal-oriented,w tih two components - agency (ability to identify goals) and pathways (ability to problem-solve to attain goals); then, there are numerous related constructs. Certainly social support and locus of control are associated with these variables. It is important to approach "positive psychology" from a scientific, rather than pollyannish perspective - so, of course, it is logical to doubt the usefulness of hope or optimism - in some contexts, these may be useless characteristics. Although, we do tend to find that even people experiencing horrible traumas or terrible medical difficulties, and even depression, that they are able to identify something positive in their life or experiences.

Without hope one can catastrophize and globalize current conditions, believing that life is devoid of change. I see this as a major impediment for resiliency. Hope offers the opportunity to believe that one's circumstances are temporary and in the midst of trauma that optimism can make all the difference in the world.

First let me say that as an area of research I am very intrigued by the field of positive psychology. My work as a clinician is what has inspired my interest; in particular, my intention as a clinician to shift from a deficit-based perspective of problems to one that more deliberately considers, recruits and facilitates strengths. With regards to hope, I find Jameson Hirsch's distinction between hope as the mechanism and resiliency as an outcome state helpful (if I captured it correctly). In my clients, I also have observed a distinction between what I would call faith-based hope versus fear-based hope. My clinical sense is that resiliency comes from the simultaneous ability to plan and work toward an outcome (the hope part) but at the same to let go of grasping to a precise expectation of the outcome (the faith part). Are there any evidence-based clinical tools for measuring/evaluating any of these aspects?

"Realistic optimism is one of seven traits assessed in the Resilience Factor Inventory (RFI) Developed by Andrew Shatte while at the University of Pennsylvania which of course is renown as the center of positive psychology. See Reivich and Shatte (2002). Realistic Optimism is defined as a reality-based belief that the future is positive. Sounds like another way of defining hope... a belief that things can/will get better in the future. In my own recently finished dissertation (hurray!) results, relationships, and grit appear to be the three foundations that sustains long-term expat aid workers and were the key factors in their success.