OBJECTIVE

To study the relationship between optimism and risk-taking behaviors among college going and
working adults.
INTRODUCTION
Optimism is a cognitive expectancy for desirable events or things to happen in future. Optimism
is also characterized as a disposition or trait, which people are endowed with in varying degrees.
It is considered to be a relatively stable and enduring trait, which guides how people perceive
and address particular situations. The early understanding and usage of the term ‘optimism’ was
either neutral or negative, as evident from the works of eminent philosophers and psychologists
like Descartes, Freud, Hegel, and Nietzsche (Domino & Conway, 2001). This was because of
dominant negative outlook towards human nature in the field of psychology at that time. With
advancements in research in psychology and dominance of humanistic school of thought towards
the end of twentieth century, there was a change in perspective towards the concept of optimism.
Optimism have been defined by researchers from various perspective, like
Optimism

is

cognitive

construct

(expectancies

regard-
ing

future

outcomes)

that

also

relates

to

motivation:
optimistic
people

exert

effort,

whereas

pessimistic

peo-
ple

disengage

from

effort.

Study

of

optimism

began
largely

in

health

contexts,

finding

positive

associations
between

optimism

and

markers
of

better

psychological
and

physical

health.

Physical

health

effects

likely

occur
through

differences

in

both

health-promoting

behaviors
and

physiological

concomitants

of

coping
Martin Seligman in 1990 define Optimism as “the tendency to believe that one will generally
experience good outcomes, as opposed to bad outcomes, in life."
While carver and colleagues (2010) define optimism as “the extent to which people differ in
regard to having expectancies of favorable outcomes in their future”.
Optimism has been linked to psychological and physical well-being. The study of optimism has
contributed a lot to what people understand about optimism today.
Theories of optimism:
Based on contemporary research, there are two dominant approaches and theoretical models to
optimism: Dispositional Optimism Model by Scheier and Carver (1985) and Optimism as an
Explanatory Style by Seligman (1990).
Dispositional optimism:
Michael Scheier and Charles Carver (1985) formulated the theory of dispositional optimism.
This theory has been foundational in understanding the relationship between optimism, coping
strategies, health, and overall well-being. Although they recognized optimism's many benefits,
they also acknowledged that too much optimism, especially if unrealistic, might not always be
beneficial. Overall, their work emphasized the protective and positive effects of an optimistic
perspective.
In their self-regulation theory, Scheier and Carver introduced the idea of optimism as a
characteristic of personality. They later termed it ‘dispositional optimism’, describing it as the
degree to which individuals expect positive future outcomes. Their model is widely recognized
and has robust evidence supporting its validity. Importantly, they viewed optimism as a general
expectation, not tied to any specific event or situation. They distinguished between optimists,
who generally anticipate positive outcomes, and pessimists, who tend to foresee negative ones.
They theorized that optimists, given their positive outlook, set valued goals and persistently
pursue them even when faced with challenges, using effective coping methods. This makes them
more likely to achieve their objectives. On the other hand, pessimists often feel doubt and
hesitation, leading to negative emotions.
While Scheier and Carver saw optimism as a fairly stable personality trait, research has indicated
varying levels of stability. Although optimism was found to be less stable than some other traits,
it wasn't completely fixed. A decade-long study by Segerstrom (2007) showed variations in
participants' levels of optimism over time. Additional studies, like Feldman et al. (2015), also
observed changes in optimism levels, suggesting that interventions can potentially boost one's
optimism.

Learned optimism :
Another conceptual model concerning optimism is Martin Seligman's (1998) "Learned
Optimism" approach, rooted in attribution theory and the concept of learned helplessness.
Seligman (1990) posits that an explanatory style, or the way one interprets and understands life
events, is central to this theory. This style hinges on three key dimensions:
Internality/Externality: This determines whether an individual attributes an event's cause to
internal factors (like one's own behavior or characteristics) or external factors (like others'
actions or situational factors).
Stability/Unstability: This considers whether an individual perceives the cause as constant over
time or subject to change.
Specificity/Globality: This refers to whether an individual believes a cause is universal across
different scenarios or is confined to specific situations.
The idea of learned helplessness emerged from studies showing that when individuals feel they
cannot escape negative or harmful stimuli, they develop a sense of powerlessness. This concept
was originally used to understand depression. Abramsom and his team (1978) discovered that
such feelings could arise from internal, stable, and global attributions to negative events. For
instance, thinking, "I always mess things up and always will" can lead to feelings of
helplessness.
Seligman expanded on this by introducing "Learned Optimism." In this view, optimists attribute
negative events to external, unstable, and specific causes. For example, they might think, "The
traffic light was malfunctioning, which is rare, and I typically pay attention." Therefore,
optimists are less likely to be overwhelmed by setbacks and view challenges as opportunities for
growth and positive change in the future.
Seligman (2003) emphasized that the primary distinction between optimistic and pessimistic
explanatory styles lies in the interpretation of success and failure events, the frequency of
positive and negative occurrences, and the ability to maintain hope. Importantly, Seligman
(2013) believes that individuals can change their explanatory styles, transitioning from a
pessimistic to an optimistic outlook.

Applications of optimism:
Optimism, the expectation of positive outcomes and a general positive outlook on life, has been a
focal point for numerous researchers, revealing its profound applications in various domains.
 In the realm of health and well-being, optimism has been linked to faster recovery from
illnesses. Scheier and Carver (1985) proposed that optimistic individuals are better at
coping with stress, which can contribute to better health outcomes. Similarly, Peterson
and Seligman (1984) discussed how an optimistic explanatory style could act as a
protective factor against certain illnesses.
 In the context of education, Seligman's (1990) work indicates that optimistic students
tend to be more resilient and perform better academically. This could be attributed to their
more adaptive problem-solving strategies and perseverance in the face of challenges.
 Additionally, within business and work environments, Luthans (2002) introduced the
concept of "psychological capital," emphasizing optimism's role in enhancing job
performance and satisfaction. Optimistic employees, as suggested by Seligman (1998),
tend to be more productive, better at sales, and more effective in leadership roles.
 Regarding mental health, Taylor and Brown (1988) proposed that positive illusions,
including optimism, can enhance well-being and mental health. Optimistic individuals, as
 supported by research from Carver, Scheier, and Segerstrom (2010), tend to use more
effective coping strategies, viewing stressful events as challenges rather than threats.
 In the context of relationships, Srivastava, McGonigal, Richards, Butler, and Gross
(2006) found that optimists, due to their positive outlook, often engage in constructive
behaviors, leading to more satisfying and longer-lasting relationships.
 Furthermore, in the sports sector, Seligman's (1991) research indicates that optimistic
athletes not only perform better but also recover more efficiently from injuries. The
pervasive influence of optimism can be seen in a variety of fields, highlighting its
importance as a positive psychological trait.

Risk-Taking Behaviors
High-risk behaviors are acts that increase the risk of disease or injury, which can subsequently
lead to disability, death, or social problems. The most common high-risk behaviors include
violence, alcoholism, tobacco use disorder, risky sexual behaviors, and eating disorders.
Researchers have defined risk- taking in various ways:
Risky behavior or risk-taking behavior is defined according to Trimpop (1994) as “any
consciously, or non-consciously controlled behavior with a perceived uncertainty about its
outcome, and/or about its possible benefits, or costs for the physical, economic or psycho-social
well-being of oneself or others.”
Turner et al. (2004) described risk-taking behavior further as either a socially unacceptable
volitional behavior with a potentially negative outcome in which precautions are not taken, such
as speeding, drinking and driving, drugs abuse, unprotected sex, ..., or a socially accepted
behavior in which the danger is recognized (climbing, competitive sports, etc.).
Risk-taking is defined variably by researchers, often encompassing goals, values, options, and
outcomes. At its core, it involves pursuing actions that could lead to undesirable or harmful
outcomes. While some researchers appreciate the broad definition of risk-taking – covering acts
from telling a joke to drunk driving – others find it too encompassing, making the assessment
problematic. Some behaviors are considered prototypical risks, while others are seen as less
prototypical. The perception of risk is also subjective; what one sees as risky, another might not.
For instance, an act might seem risky to an adult but not to a child, based on their individual
perceptions and values. Additionally, risk perception can be influenced by one's awareness; some
may unknowingly engage in risky behaviors due to naivete. A person's skill level further
complicates this definition; a skilled individual may not see an action as risky if they're adept at
it, while an unskilled individual might. Context also plays a role in defining risk. For instance,
drinking moderately is different from excessive drinking, and the risks associated with
unprotected sex can vary based on the partner's health status. In essence, risk-taking is
multifaceted, with its perception and definition shaped by various factors.
Risk-taking behavior can take on various forms, and researchers from diverse disciplines have
studied and classified these behaviors over the years. Some prominent categories include
physical risk-taking, which involves activities like extreme sports and reckless driving, studied
by Zuckerman (1979) using the Sensation Seeking Scale. Social risk-taking encompasses actions
such as public speaking or asking someone out, explored in terms of fear of negative evaluation
by Leary (1983). Financial risk-taking, like investing in stocks or starting a business, is explained
by Kahneman and Tversky's (1979) Prospect Theory. Ethical risk-taking involves weighing
personal gain against moral principles, as researched by Treviño, Weaver, and Reynolds (2006)
in the context of unethical behavior. Health/recreational risk-taking, including substance abuse or
unprotected sex, is investigated by Jessor (1987) through the Problem Behavior Theory.
Intellectual risk-taking, associated with pursuing controversial research topics, has been
discussed by Beghetto (2009) in relation to creativity. Lastly, career/professional risk-taking,
which involves decisions impacting one's career, is explored in the realm of organizational
behavior and management by researchers like Luthans (1989). These categories often overlap,
and risk-taking behavior is a complex, multifaceted field, influenced by context and individual
differences.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE
There have been many studies conducted on risky taking behavior and optimism.
Prabhakar, T., Lee, S. H. V., & Job, R. F. S. (1996) conducted a study on Risk-taking, optimism
bias and risk utility in young drivers. Both young and older drivers, regardless of gender,
exhibited overconfidence in their driving abilities. This overconfidence, or optimism effect, was
found to increase with age. Males were generally more optimistically biased compared to
females. The survey revealed that participants overestimated the casualties in traffic accidents,
which could contribute to this optimism bias. Such bias might lead drivers to believe they're less
vulnerable to crashes since they perceive others as being in worse situations than they really are.
Additionally, individuals who valued thrill-seeking behaviors like speeding or impressing peers
were more likely to report committing moving violations. Despite the role of optimism in driving
behaviors, age and gender stood out as the strongest predictors of committing these violations.
Bench, S. W., Bera, J. L., & Cox, J. (2021) conducted research on whether State boredom results
in optimistic perception of risk and increased risk-taking. Research comprising four studies. In
Study 1 and Study 2, participants who felt bored showed less concern about risks and
underestimated potential causes of death compared to those who felt neutral, angry, or fearful.
Study 3 found that bored participants had a more optimistic view of risks, expressed a greater
likelihood of taking risks, and saw more benefits in risk-taking compared to participants in
neutral and fear conditions. Study 4 demonstrated that boredom led participants to take more
risks in a behavioral test (Balloon Analogue Risk Task). these studies confirm that boredom leads
to optimistic risk perceptions and increased risk-taking, aligning with the idea that boredom's
function is to push individuals to explore alternate scenarios.
Wang, J., Cui, R., Stolarz-Fantino, S., Fantino, E., & Liu, X. (2022) explored how mood and
dispositional optimism influence risk-taking in undergraduate students from the United States (N
= 141) and the People’s Republic of China (N = 90). Participants filled out a questionnaire on
optimism and underwent a mood-inducing task before choosing a difficulty level for a reasoning
task, with harder levels considered riskier due to a greater chance of failure. In the American
sample, a more positive mood and greater optimism led to choosing easier tasks (less risk-
taking), while in the Chinese sample, they resulted in selecting harder tasks (more risk-taking).
This suggests that mood and optimism's effect on decision-making may vary based on nationality
or culture.
Man, S. S., Yu, R., Zhang, T., & Chan, A. H. S. (2022) conducted research with the aim to
empirically investigate how optimism bias and safety climate influence construction worker risk-
taking behavior. A survey was conducted to collect data of 183 construction workers. The
collected data were subjected to statistical analysis by using structural equation modeling.
Results show that optimism bias related to work risks positively influences construction worker
risk-taking behavior, whereas safety climate and optimism bias related to hazard perception skills
negatively affect the risk-taking behavior.
A laboratory experiment was conducted by Dohmen, Quercia & Willrodt (2023) to understand
the relation between optimism and risk taking on 348 participants who were students from
different fields using general risk question, which asked respondents to state their willingness to
take risks on a 11-point Likert scale. It was found that dispositional optimism is a predictor for
respondents’ focus on favorable or unfavorable outcomes when answering the general risk
question and optimists tend to imagine good aspects of risk while pessimists tend to imagine bad
ones. The tendency to focus on good or bad outcomes of risk in turn affects both the self-
reported willingness to take risk and actual risk-taking behavior.

HYPOTHESES
I. There is no significant relationship between optimism and risk-taking behavior among
college going students and working adults.
II. There is no significant difference among college going and working adults in terms of
risk taking.
III. There is no significant difference among college going and working adults in terms of
optimism.

METHOD
Sample:
 For the present practicum, a total number of 361 participants were assessed. There were 2
groups-first consisted of college going students of 18-24 years of age, and the second consisted
of working adults of age group 28-40.
The individual data for this study was collected from three male college going students and three
male working adults. The same was done by my classmates, after which the data of whole class
was pooled together.

Measures/Tools Used:
For the present practicum, two tools were used, namely, LOT-R for measuring optimism and
DOSPERT for measuring risk-tsking behavior.
LOT-R (Revised Life Orientation Test) was developed by Scheier, Carver and Bridges in 1994.
The questionnaire contains 10 items that measure optimism of individuals. The scale is a 5-point
Likert scale with each item having five options to choose from, namely, strongly disagree,
disagree, neutral, agree and strongly agree, all of which are scored in 0,1,2,3,4 fashion
respectively. The reliability (internal consistency) is 0.8.
DOSPERT (Domain Specific Risk-Taking) scale was developed by Weber, Blais, and Betz in
2002. The scale measures risk taking behaviors in five domains i.e., Financial, health/ safety,
social, ethical and recreational. The scale has 30 items and is a seven points Likert scale with
each having 7 options, namely, extremely unlikely, moderately likely, somewhat likely, not sure,
somewhat likely, moderately likely, und extremely likely. Each of which is scored in a 1 to 7
fashion respectively.

Design:
The present study used correlational design. A correlational design investigates relationships
between two variables (or more) without the researcher controlling or manipulating any of them.

Procedure:
1. The topic was decided by class discussion after some research.
2. Research question was formed, hypotheses were developed and then the tools were decided,
accordingly.
3. A google form was made for the collection of data which consisted of two questionnaires
related to optimism and risk-taking behavior.
4. Individual data was collected from college going students (18-21) as well as from working
(28-40) adults.
 5. Then, the data of the whole class was pooled.
6. Analysis was done using Pearson correlation and T-test.

RESULT
The findings of the practicum are as follows:
Group N Mean Median SD SE
Risk T 1 (female) 197 111.4 112.0 22.68 1.616
2 (male) 164 109.5 109.0 23.21 1.812
Optimism T 1 (female) 197 13.2 13.2 4.10 0.292
2 (male) 164 14.0 14.0 3.50 0.273
Table : descriptives of the group data

Risk T Optimism T
Risk T Pearson’s r -
p- value -
Optimism T Pearson’s r -0.054 -
p-value 0.310 -
Table 2: Pearson’s correlation between optimism and risk-taking behaviors
statistic df p
Risk T Student’s t 0.794 359 0.428
Optimism T Student’s t -2.012 359 0.045*
Table 3: independent sample t-test

Interpretation:
The objective of the present practicum was to study the relationship between optimism and risk-
taking behaviors among college going and working adults. For this, data was collected from 361
participants through google forms. The data was analyzed using Jamovi software.
The results revealed that there was no significant correlation between optimism and Risk taking.
Thus, hypothesis 1is failed to be rejected. There could be various reasons for this, firstly, some
researchers collected data in a distance mode by sending the link to the form of questionnaires
online while others collected data in a face-to-face mode, this could have caused some errors.
Also, people are generally optimistic about their futures, this optimism do not necessarily
translate to an increased propensity for risk-taking (Weinstein, N. D.,1980). Additionally,
individuals might be optimistically biased about potential outcomes, but this bias doesn’t always
mean they would take more risks (Josephs and collogues.,1992). Also, Optimism alone does not
drive risk-taking propensity (Gibson et al.,2004).
The result also showed no significant difference between the age groups (college going and
working adult) with respect risk taking behaviors. Thus, Hypothesis 2 is failed to be rejected.
There could be various possible reasons for this. Firstly, a general questionnaire was taken and
since risk taking is such a wide phenomenon the questionnaire taken might not have been able to
represent the risk-taking trends in the population. Secondly, Both, college students and young
working adults are often in the emerging adult phase of life (approximately 18-29 years). Arnett
(2000) described this phase as characterized by exploration, instability, self-focus, and feeling in-
between. The developmental similarities could contribute to similar risk-taking patterns. Also,
risk propensity is a highly individual trait. It can vary widely among both college students and
working adults. Some students may be very risk-averse, while some working adults might be
more willing to take risks (Nicholson et al.,2005).
However, the result shows significant correlation (at the 0.05 level) between the two age groups
(college going and working adult) with respect to optimism. Thus, Hypothesis 3 is rejected. The
possible reason for the findings could many including life experiences, responsibilities, and
stages of personal development. College students are often in a transitional phase, figuring out
their careers and life trajectories, while working adults are already in the workforce and dealing
with the responsibilities and stressors that come with that role. Also, working adults’ optimism
and personal resources (like control, self-esteem, and social support) could influence each other
over time. Job-related challenges, responsibilities, and financial pressures can affect optimism in
working adults differently than college students (Segerstrom, S. C.,2007).
CONCLUSION
The objective of the present practicum was to study the relationship between optimism and risk-
taking behaviors among college going and working adults. The results showed no relationship
between optimism and risk taking and no significant difference between the age groups (college
going and working adult) with respect risk taking behaviors but significant correlation (at the
0.05 level) between the two age groups (college going and working adult) with respect to
optimism was found.

LIMITATION
The focus on the review of literature was not enough.
REFERENCE
Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through
the twenties. American psychologist, 55(5), 469.
Bazerman, M. H. (1984). The relevance of Kahneman and Tversky's concept of framing to
organizational behavior. Journal of Management, 10(3), 333-343.
Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Correlates of intellectual risk taking in elementary school science.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for
Research in Science Teaching, 46(2), 210-223.
Bench, S. W., Bera, J. L., & Cox, J. (2021). State boredom results in optimistic perception of risk
and increased risk-taking. Cognition and emotion, 35(4), 649-663.
Carbone, E. G., & Echols, E. T. (2017). Effects of optimism on recovery and mental health after
a tornado outbreak. Psychology & health, 32(5), 530-548.
Carr, A. (2004). Positive Psychology: The Science of Happiness and Human Strength. London,
UK: Routledge.
Carver, Charles & Scheier, Michael. (2009). Optimism. Encyclopedia of positive psychology. 2.
Dohmen, T., Quercia, S., & Willrodt, J. (2023). On the psychology of the relation between
optimism and risk taking. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1-22.
Gibson, B., & Sanbonmatsu, D. M. (2004). Optimism, pessimism, and gambling: The downside
of optimism. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 30(2), 149-160.
Jessor, R. (1987). Problem‐behavior theory, psychosocial development, and adolescent problem
drinking. British journal of addiction, 82(4), 331-342.
Josephs, R. A., Larrick, R. P., Steele, C. M., & Nisbett, R. E. (1992). Protecting the self from the
negative consequences of risky decisions. Journal of personality and social psychology, 62(1),
26.
Leary, M. R. (1983). A brief version of the Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale. Personality and
social psychology bulletin, 9(3), 371-375.
Luthans, F., & Thomas, L. T. (1989). The relationship between age and job satisfaction:
curvilinear results from an empirical study–a research note. Personnel Review, 18(1), 23-26.
Man, S. S., Yu, R., Zhang, T., & Chan, A. H. S. (2022). How optimism bias and safety climate
influence the risk-taking behavior of construction workers. International journal of
environmental research and public health, 19(3), 1243.
Nicholson, N., Soane, E., Fenton‐O'Creevy, M., & Willman, P. (2005). Personality and domain‐
specific risk taking. Journal of Risk Research, 8(2), 157-176.
Prabhakar, T., Lee, S. H. V., & Job, R. F. S. (1996). Risk-taking, optimism bias and risk utility in
young drivers. In road safety research and enforcement conference, 1996, coo gee beach, new
south Wales, Australia, 33(5), 110-119.
Segerstrom, S. C., & Sephton, S. E. (2010). Optimistic expectancies and cell-mediated
immunity: The role of positive affect. Psychological science, 21(3), 448-455.
Snyder, C. R., & Lopez, S. (Eds.) (2002). Handbook of Positive Psychology. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Treviño, L. K., Weaver, G. R., & Reynolds, S. J. (2006). Behavioral ethics in organizations: A
review. Journal of management, 32(6), 951-990.
Trimpop, R. (1994). The psychology of risk-taking behavior. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
Turner, C., McClure, R., & Pirozzo, S. (2004). Injury and risk-taking behavior-a systematic
review. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 36, 93–101
Taylor, S. E., & Brown, J. D. (1994). Positive illusions and well-being revisited: separating fact
from fiction.
Wang, J., Cui, R., Stolarz-Fantino, S., Fantino, E., & Liu, X. (2022). Differences in mood,
optimism, and risk-taking behavior between American and Chinese college students. Frontiers in
psychology, 12, 781609.
Weinstein, N. D. (1980). Unrealistic optimism about future life events. Journal of personality
and social psychology, 39(5), 806.
Zuckerman, M. (1979). Sensation seeking and risk taking. In Emotions in personality and
psychopathology (pp. 161-197). Boston, MA: Springer US.