Assessing the Importance of Childhood Context in the Development of Hope and Optimism
- PDF / 559,938 Bytes
- 9 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 61 Downloads / 194 Views
Assessing the Importance of Childhood Context in the Development of Hope and Optimism Jason Fletcher1
© Springer Nature B.V. 2019
Abstract This paper explores the importance of adolescent environments as a key determinant of hope and optimism. Data were taken from the prospective, nationally representative National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health to calculate correlations in hope and optimism among individuals who attended the same secondary school. These correlations generate upper-bound estimates of the influence of adolescent environments and suggest relatively modest contributions, accounting for 1–3% of population variation. In contrast, sibling correlations account for approximately 10% of the variation. Taken together, the results suggest that interventions that shape schools and neighborhoods during adolescence are likely to have relatively small benefits for hope and optimism development. Keywords Neighborhood effects · Hope · Adolescent development
1 Introduction The importance of individual differences in hope and optimism have been extensively documented in research across several disciplines. For example, hope and optimism have been tied to positive outcomes, especially to the ability to cope with problems (Andersson 1996) and pursuing heathy lifestyles (Scheier and Carver 1987). Related measures in adulthood have been linked with education and earnings outcomes (Goldsmith et al. 1997) as well as late life mortality (Giltay et al. 2004). In contrast to the vast literature describing the impacts of hope and optimism, the origins of the development of these traits are less understood (Esteves et al. 2013; Otis et al. 2016: see Yarcheski and Mahon 2014 for recent meta-analysis of predictors). Snyder (2000) suggests one of the most powerful contributing factors in the development of an individual’s hope and optimism involves the home environment, especially family-child interactions. Bowlby (1980) focuses attention on parental attachment styles but also on genetic predispositions. Together, these theories suggest both large inherited and environmental components. Indeed, Mosing et al. (2009) estimate 36% of the variance in optimism is heritable. * Jason Fletcher [email protected] 1
La Follette School of Public Affairs, Department of Sociology, Center for Demography and Ecology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
J. Fletcher
Gillham and Reivich (2004) estimate that 22% of positive affect is heritable, where “I felt hopeful about the future” was one of the four components. The authors also estimate that none of the variation is from shared sibling factors (i.e. neighborhoods and schools). Indeed, with a few exceptions, specific environmental and neighborhood factors related to hope and optimism are not well understood. Lorion and Saltzman (1993) show that neighborhood factors, like violence and poverty, appear to shape adolescents’ abilities to think about the future and the development of hope. Thomson et al. (2015) show evidence that school connec
Data Loading...
