Optimism/Pessimism and Its Relationship with Locus of Control Among Children and Adolescents

Department of Counseling Psychology, Faculty of Education University of Aleppo, Syria.

Corresponding Author: Mohammad Qassim Abdullah, Department of Counseling Psychology, Faculty of Education University of Aleppo, Syria, E-Mail: [email protected]

Received Date: 18 Oct 2017    Accepted Date: 03 Jan 2018    Published Date: 08 Jan 2018 Copyright © 2016 Kohler B S

Citation: Abdullah MQ. (2018). Optimism/Pessimism and Its Relationship with Locus of Control Among Children and Adolescents. Mathews J Psychiatry Ment Health. 3(1): 017.

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to examine the gender and developmental period differences in optimism-pessimism and locus of control. Additionally, it aimed to assess the correlation between optimism-pessimism and subscale of locus of control (internal, external, and unknown). The sample consisted (340) participants of school students (165 boys and 125 girls) enrolled randomly, from primary and preparatory schools located in Aleppo city. The participants aged between 10 to 15 years (M= 12.4 male, 12.8 female).The participants completed two measures: 1-Optimism-Pessimism Scale (OPS) 2- Connell's locus of Control Scale for Children (CLCS-C). Findings of the study revealed that, the external locus of control were higher among girls than among boys, while no significant differences had been found in internal and unknown locus of control. Aon the other hand, finding showed that, there was significant gender differences for optimism. Boys were found to be more optimistic than girls were. Regarding the correlation between optimism-pessimism and subscale of locus of control, there was significant and positive correlation between optimism and Internal control. Additionally between pessimism and external control on one hand, and between pessimism and unknown locus control on the other hand. Furthermore, it has been found a negative and significant correlation between pessimism and internal control and between optimism and unknown locus of control.

KEYWORDS Optimism-Pessimism; Locus of Control (Internal, External, Unknown); Children; Adolescents.

INTRODUCTION

The personality of a child depends upon several factors including family composition, home environment, socialization, childhood experiences, education, socio-economic status, parents' occupations etc. Family influences on personality development are highly significant as parent child relationship, parenting, emotional climate of home; size and type of family determine the process of development during childhood years. (Kokkinos, & Logginidou, 2005). The relation a child has with parents and other family members is one of the most important factors in personality development as family provides physical safety, economic support, social and emotional security (Rigby, 1993, Massachusetts, 2000, Batabyal, A. & Nijkamp, P 2017).

Optimism, pessimism and locus of control have been shown to be pervasive and important attributes of human thought and expression. Optimism has been shown to mitigate the effects of stressors on psychological functioning. Dispositional optimists (who hold generalized positive outcome expectancies) have shown less mood disturbance in response to a number of different stressors, including adaptation to school and college, (Yates, (2000). Optimism has also been associated with better physical and mental health. (Lennings, 2000). Recent years have witnessed substantial progress in understanding the contribution of psychosocial factors to physical and psychological health. One such factor, optimism, or the expectation of positive outcomes, has been tied to better physical health and more successful coping with health challenges (Ismail, A. (2001). However, the routes by which optimism might be associated with better health have not received systematic investigation. One plausible route is through effects on the immune system. Optimists cope differently with stressors, experience less negative mood, and may have more adaptive health behaviors, all of which could lead to better immune status (Abdel-Kaleq,2000; Mahasnehm, AlZoubi & Batayeneh,2013).

Theoretical Background Optimism:The word optimism comes from the Latin word “optimum”, which means ‘best”. Appropriately then, optimism has been frequently linked to better physiological and psychological well-being. The term has many definitions but in its most typical use it refers to a mindset in which one holds overall positive expectations in any given situation and about the future. Put simply, whereas pessimists expect bad things to happen to them, optimists expect good things to happen to them. In psychological research, the term is usually operationalised in one of two ways: as expectational optimism or explanatory style (Mahasnehm, Al-Zoubi & Batayeneh,2013).

The theorist of learned deficit theory sees that the mechanism responsible of acquiring optimism-pessimism is embedded in the thinking style practiced by the individual in facing the annoying and pleasing situations. This is also termed as the “optimistic interpretative method and pessimistic interpretative method” (Seligman, 1991). Seligman further defined optimism as “how people interpret themselves in cases of successes and failures (Seligman, 1990). Optimistic people see that failure is due to some changeable thing, so as to be able to succeed in the next time. On the other hand, pessimistic people burden themselves with blame. In this interpretive pattern, the negative interpretations of persons concerning the past events influence their expectation to have control over the future events, and subsequently, they influence the feelings and behavior, (Makri-Botsari, 2001). If someone experiences an annoying situation, he/she tends most often to adopt a certain image of the cause for the occurrence of such annoying situation. The closer are the perceived reasons of the situation to the person’s ability to control and govern, the more the likely he/she will face the situation effectively; that is exactly the optimism,(Seligman, 1991).

Al-Ansari, (2001), defined optimism as “the positive view, loving life and belief in the possibility of good occurrences, or the good aspect of things, rather than the bad aspect.” Optimism is a readiness lies inside the single individual, concentrated in the general expectation that good or positive things will happen, i.e. expectation of positive results of the forthcoming events. Abdel haleq (2000) defines optimism by that it is a rejoicing view of the future, making the person expects better, anticipates occurrence of goodness, and looks forward for success. On the other hand, pessimism is a negative anticipation of the events to come, making the person expects worst things to happen, and anticipates badness, failure and disappointment (O’Connor, & Cassidy, 2007, Hinz, A. , Sander, C., Glaesmer, H., Brahler, E., Zenger, M. Hilbert, A. & Kocalevent, R. ( 2017).Optimism is unstable specific external explanation for bad events termed “ optimists”. (WHO, 2017).

Optimists are people who expect good things to happen to them; pessimists are people who expect bad things to happen to them. Folk psychology has long held that these differences among people are important. Research over the past two and a half decades suggests that the folk wisdom is right (at least in this case). This rather simple difference—anticipating well versus anticipating bad—is linked to core processes that underlie behavior. (Maruta, Colligan, Malinchoc, & Offord, 2000). The ways in which optimists and pessimists differ in their approach to the world have substantial impact on their lives. These people differ in how they confront problems; they differ in how well they cope with adversity; they also differ in their resources, both social and socioeconomic. Individual differences in optimism are relevant to clinical psychology because this dimension is associated, both directly and indirectly, and at both an individual and a social level, with risk for psychopathology, (Alloy et al., 2006).

Pessimism: Pessimistic individuals tend to attribute negative outcomes to permanent internal causes, such as low ability. On the other hand, they attribute positive outcomes to external factors over which they have little control, such as luck or other people’s whims. Individuals’ interpretation of events is more powerful in determining their behavior than the facts of the situation. The perception that one is unable to cause good outcomes can result in lack of motivation, or “learned helplessness” (Seligman, 1991) since the individual has no reason to expect that he or she can have a positive influence on life events (Abdel Khaleq, 2000).

Pessimism is a tendency to stress the negative or unfavorable view. Pessimists perform more poorly in various places like school, work, and play than optimists. Pessimists have poorer resistance, weaker immune systems, are more susceptible to depression, and age physically faster than the optimists (Clark, 1997) age. It is also found that optimism is positively related with psychological well-being, (Tadhy, Chelli, and Padiri, 2015). Pessimists make stable, global, and internal explanation for bad events . on the other hand dispositional optimism is expectation that good events will be plentiful and bad events rare in future, (WHO,2017).

Optimism/pessimism No doubt, that disagreement is wide among researchers in looking at the relation between the optimism and pessimism concepts. Thus, we shall refer to two trends, at least, in this relation

First, optimism and pessimism are two separate traits, yet interrelated, meaning that each trait has a relatively independent continuum, combines the different degrees on the one trait; and every person has a site on the optimism continuum that is independent from its center on the pessimism continuum. Here every trait-independently- is considered unipolar, starting from the lowest degree (may be zero) to the highest degree. The same matter is repeated -independently- with pessimism.

Second, optimism and pessimism are one single trait, but it is bipolar. In other words, the trait continuum here has two opposite poles, with everybody having a one center on it, so that he/she may fall among the extreme optimism and intensive pessimism. This implies that the human, in general, cannot be extremely optimistic or very pessimistic, as he/she has a one degree on the continuum, the same is in extroversionintroversion traits (Al-Ansari, 2003).

The significance of the study of optimism-pessimism lies in the importance of its relationship to the different aspects of the normal and abnormal human personality. Seligman's Theory in Attribution assured that the method through which we interpret things or evens is more influential on our current and future behavior than their occurrences; having either good or bad implications upon our mental and physical health (Al-Hajjar, 1989).

Results of many previous studies, such as Al-Ansari (2003) Cohen (2001), Lennings (2000), Dillenberger, D., Postlewaite, A. & Rozen, K.(2017), indicate that optimism is positively related to a number of the normal variables such as: mental health, physical health, life satisfaction, happiness, effective encounter of pressures, successful problem solving, occupational performance, good academic performance, extroversion, work motivation, production quality, self-control, low levels of pain and tiredness, ( Maruta, Colligan, Malinchoc, & Offord, 2000).

As with all psychological traits, differences in both dispositional optimism and pessimism and in attribution style are heritable. Both optimism and pessimism are strongly influenced by environmental factors, including family environment. It has been suggested that optimism may be indirectly inherited as a reflection of underlying heritable traits such as intelligence, temperament and alcoholism. Many theories assume optimism can be learned, and research supports a modest role of family-environment acting to raise (or lower) optimism and lower (or raise) neuroticism and pessimism. Work utilizing brain imaging and biochemistry suggests that at a biological trait level, optimism and pessimism reflect brain systems specialized for the tasks of processing and incorporating beliefs regarding good and bad information respectively ( Abdel Latif, & Hamada, 1998).

Locus of control Rotter (1966, as cited in Seville & Robinson, 2000) derived the theoretical construct of locus of control (LOC) to better explain individual differences in learning. Originally, LOC was measured using a one-dimensional, forced-choice, self-report test with twenty-nine items. A Person's score represented the number of choices indicating "external" control, (Singh, & Mansi. 2009,). Thus, low scores indicate the belief that one has control over events in his/her life (i.e., internal locus of control), whereas high scores indicate the belief that circumstances are the result of external influences such as the actions of other people or luck (i.e., external locus of control), (Guarnera, S., & Williams, R. (1987). Rotter posited that persons with an internal LOC are more adaptable than persons with an external LOC. For example, people with a strong internal LOC probably are more aware of environmental information that provides feedback for future behavior, and take steps to improve their environmental circumstances (Rotter, 1975). These characteristics are important for succession chronic pain treatment, because patients must learn more effective ways of coping, including pain management skills, (Singh, & Mansi. 2009).

During the last 25 years, one of the most widely researched personality variables has been locus of control, the generalized expectancy of reinforcement as either internal or external to the self (Strickland, 1989). Locus of control is a generalized construct wherein the individual has the power to perceive outcomes as being independent of one’s own behavior and the result of chance, or to believe that outcomes are related to one’s own behavior; and effort locus of control is a term in psychology that refers to a personal’s belief about what causes the good or bad results in his/her life, either in general or in a specific area such as health or academics. One’s locus (Hatin for “place” or “location) can either be internal (meaning the persons believe that they control their life) or external (meaning they believe that their environment, some higher power, or other people control their decisions and their life), (Campis, Lyman & Prentice-Dunn, 1986).

The individual who expects an outcome or reinforcement to be contingent upon his or her own behavior may be described as having an internal belief of locus of control. Individuals with internal locus of control believe that the outcomes of their actions are result of their own abilities. They also believe that they can influence the work environments, whereas individuals with external locus of control believe that events which happen in their lives are controlled by factors beyond their control and even that their own action are a results of external factors, such as fate, luck, the influence of powerful others (Maruta, Colligan, , Malinchoc, & Offord, 2000). Thus, the LOC concept is based on the cause and consequence relationship and therefore, future expectations can be construed in terms of current behavior. Externals are less willing to take risks, to work on self-improvement and to better themselves through remedial work than internals. Internals are less prone to depression than externals, as well as being less prone to helplessness, (Elizabeth 2007). Similar results are also found in some other studies (Mamlin, Harris, &Case, 2001, Al-Hajjar, 1989 ). Hoorens, Damme, Helweg-Larsen, & Sedikides, (2016) has been concluded that,"observers evaluate an optimistic (more so than a pessimistic) claimant favorably. However, observers view a claimant who expresses comparative (vs. absolute) optimism as less likable, less warm, and less worthy as a friend. Observers do so, because they infer that the comparatively optimistic claimant regards their own future as bleak" .

About the differences between the two genders in the means of optimism-pessimism, some studies such as Abdel Khaleq's (1995) on the students of the University of Kuwait, revealed high levels of optimism degrees mean with the males as compared with females, and the reverse was true in pessimism. (Abdel Latif and Hamadeh 1998) concluded that there are significant differences between the two genders in optimism, whereas they were not apparent in pessimism. A positive correlation appeared between optimism and extroversion, and between optimism and psychosis. Al-Masha'an (2000), found statistically significant differences between males and females in optimism and mental and psychical disorders; but males were more optimistic than females. There were not statistically significant differences between males and females in pessimism. The result showed a negative significant correlation between optimism, pessimism, psychological disorders and life pressures. Al-Anazai (2001) concluded that there were no differences between the two genders in optimism, and a positive Correlation between life satisfaction, self-confidence and optimism.

The connection between optimism/pessimism and locus of control Optimistic individuals assess the social and physical environment in a positive manner, invest more effort to prevent problems or to transform them, enjoy life more and have a better behavior under stress. In contrast with the optimism is described the pessimism defined by negative expectancies on the effect of actions taken. Pessimistic individuals react to problematic situation and disappointments by renunciation, avoidance and denial. Optimism is generally associated with favorable effects. However, unwanted consequences were observed, especially in case of unrealistic or naive optimism. Optimism may correlate with negative effects under two circumstances: when it determines a passive behavior and the positive effect is expected from luck, divinity or from a friend and under the circumstances in which, even if such circumstances cannot be changed, an optimistic person persists tenaciously to change them.

Julian Rotter (1966) developed the concept of locus of control; the author argues that the attitudes and beliefs regarding the causal relationship between behaviour and effect take shape as a global personality trait and relatively stable. The concept defines the way a person explains the success or failure by internal or external causes, controllable or uncontrollable ( Abdel Khaleq, 2000). The internal locus of control is determined by the belief that the personal power and control can influence events and that the successes derive from the skills developed and from the work carried out by the person concerned. The external locus of control is shown by the belief that personal power influences events very little or not at all, being caused more by destiny, by the power of others or by luck. Experimental researches lead to the conclusion that, in the study of stress it is necessary to include locus of control. The internal locus of control might play the role of a protective factor. Externality may be defensive or passive. Furthermore, internality may take two forms: responsible and guilt-provoking. On the other hand Regression analyses indicated that optimism and locus of control were relatively independent predictors of control appraisals and that control appraisals were generally better predictors of coping than either locus of control or optimism. As expected, somewhat different patterns of significant predictors were obtained for the three stressors. Results are discussed in terms of the congruence model of effective coping, which predicts relations among control appraisals and coping for various types of stressful situations ( Peacock & Wong, 1996).

Statement of the Problem and Research Questions Many studies were conducted on optimism-pessimism, which focused on the relationship between them and number of the various personality aspects with the individuals, whether positive or negative relationship. The results of many studies, such as Abdel Khaleq (2000), Cohen (2000), Al-Ansari (2003) and Redwan (2000),indicated that optimism is positively correlated with a number of normal (or positive) variables such as mental health, physical health, happiness, life satisfaction, effective encounter of the pressures, problem solving, high academic performance, extroversion, work motivation, quality of the production and self-control. On the contrary, pessimism is correlated to the abnormal pathologic variables, such as despair, failure in problem solving, worry and depression.

This study sought to examine the relationship between optimism/pessimism and locus of control (internal, external, unknown) on one hand, and to investigate the differences in optimism/pessimism and locus of control regarding two variables: gender, and developmental period ( children and adolescents).

The specific study questions that guided this research were 1- Are there statistically significant differences in the optimism-pessimism and locus of control between boys and girls, and between children and adolescents? 2- Is there a correlation between optimism-pessimism and subscale of locus of control (internal, external, and unknown) among children and adolescents?

METHOD & PROCEDURE

Participants Data collected from (340) participants of school students (165 boys and 125 girls) enrolled randomly, from primary and preparatory schools located in Aleppo city after consent of the directorate of education administration. The participants aged between 10 to 15 years (M= 12.4 male, 12.8 female). Methodology: To investigate the relationship between optimism-pessimism and locus of control, it has been implemented the descriptive correlational method.

INSTRUMENTS

Participants completed measures of optimism-pessimism and locus of control. Each is described are following 1- Optimism -Pessimism Scale (OPS): Following the previous measures and literature, the measure had been constructed by the present researcher. It consisted of 30 items with multiple-choice answer rated from (1-5) which consist of the response: always, frequently, sometimes, infrequently and never. To verify the measure validity, it had been presented to a body of arbitrators in the department of counseling psychology of the University of Aleppo. Relying on their suggestions, the researcher made the modifications that the majority (80%) of the arbitrators proposed, to reach the high degree of content validity. The Cronbach alpha reliability of the Scale was 0.86. 2- Connell's locus of Control Scale for Children (CLCS-C): Rotter (1966) developed the questionnaire of locus of control. It has 28 item since many others have tested criticized and redefined the concept and the measurement tool. Ratter's original instrument is still in a wide used in the fields of psychological sciences and developed for implication in many cultures. The present author implemented the Arab form of Connell's locus of Control Scale for Children (CLCS-C) which include three dimensions of control: 1- control internal, 2- control external,  3- unknown control. The scale consisted of (36) items paraphrased as per Likert Style which multiple choice against each item, to select one of the four choice which weight from 1-4. The The Cronbach Alpha reliability of the scale was 0.83.

Data Collection and Statistics After conducting the schools, the author explained the background of the study to the counselors and teachers. Subsequently the children were informed about the objectives of the study. The participants who were authorized in this study, completed the self-report (OPS) and (CLCS-C) individually, after trained to tick off only one option for each scale item and were informed that all the options are correct. The administration method for each scale was paper-and-pencil. The scales administration had no time limit. The instrument were applied, with the presence of one of the counselors who was ready to answer questions in case of any doubt. The statistical package for Social Sciences software (SPSS) was used for the analysis. Descriptive parameters were shown as mean, standard deviation. T test were used to assess the differences regarding two variables: gender (boys and girls), and developmental period (children and adolescents). Pearson's correlation tests were used to evaluate the relationship between the (OPS) and (CLCS-C).

RESULTS

To explore gender differences in optimism-pessimism and locus of control, t test has been used, and the results presented in table (1).

Table 1: Mean, Standard Deviation, and T Test of the Differences for Optimism-Pessimism and Locus of Control Between Boys and Girls.

Data from (table 1) showed significant differences for optimism (sig. 0.05). Of the sample, boys were found to be more optimistic (M=54.67) than girls (M=51.82). In contrast, external locus of control were higher among girls (M=7.97) than among boys (M=6.46). On the other hand, no significant differences had been found in internal control, unknown control, and pessimism. Pearson's correlation coefficient has been used for assessing the relationship between optimism-pessimism and subscales of locus of control. The result presented in table (2).

Table 2: Correlation Coefficient between Optimism/Pessimism and Subscales of Locus of Control.

Sig. 0.05

Table (2) showed that, there was significant and positive correlation between optimism and Internal control (R= 0.43), Sig.0.05), on one hand, and significant positive correlation between pessimism and external control (R=0.38) and between pessimism and unknown control (R=0.31) on the other hand (Sig.0.05). Additionally, it has been found a negative and significant correlation between pessimism and internal control (R= -0.22, sig.0.05), and between optimism and unknown control (R= -0.29, sig. 0.05).

DISCUSSION

Regarding the gender differences for locus of control, findings of the study indicated that, the external locus of control were higher among girls than among boys, while no significant differences had been found in internal and unknown locus of control.

This finding similar to the findings of Bedel (2015) that showed female students had higher mean scores of external of control than male. On the other hand, finding showed that, there was significant gender differences for optimism. Boys were found to be more optimistic than girls were. And this finding similar to the Jacobsen (2008) reported that men were more optimistic than women overtime, Boman (2001) found that compared to the boys, girls tend to exhibit significantly higher levels of optimism, and in contrast to the Singh and Mishra (2012) that reported no significant differences found between boys and girls.

Findings of the study revealed that there was significant and positive correlation between optimism and internal control. Additionally between pessimism and external control on one hand, and between pessimism and unknown control on the other hand. Furthermore, it has been found a negative and significant correlation between pessimism and internal control and between optimism and unknown control.

A large and growing literature indicates that people who dispositionally hold positive expectations for the future respond to difficulty and adversity in more adaptive ways than students who hold negative expectations. Furthermore, optimisms likely to confer benefits in both intrapersonal and interpersonal domains, even in the absence of stress, (Yates, 2000, Singh and Mishra, 2012 ).

Most research, however, has focused on associations between an individual's own locus of control and a wide range of outcomes. For example, an internal LOCR in both children and adults reliably predicts academic achievement, social adjustment, and physical and emotional health (Fogas, Wolchik, Braver, Freedom, & Bay, 1992). Internality also relates positively to information seeking in such adverse conditions as imprisonment and to appraisals of oneself as good at problem-solving (Buntrock & Reddy, 1992). Thus, consistent with Rotter's (1966) original model of locus of control as a generalized problem solving expectancy, individuals with more internal locus of control appear more likely than those with external locus of control to believe that they will successfully manage a range of difficult situations.

Regression analyses indicated that optimism and locus of control were relatively independent predictors of control appraisals and that control appraisals were generally better predictors of coping than either locus of control or optimism. As expected, somewhat different patterns of significant predictors were obtained for the three stressors. It is revealed that a stronger correlation the optimism and control had been found, and optimistic bias is more prevalent when measured directly rather than indirectly especially in childhood (Brownell, 1991).

Very young children invest a great deal of energy in play and exploration leading to accomplishing “tasks” that they appear to define for themselves. These self-initiated behaviors seem to promote a sense of control and competence. When the child’s efforts to initiate and follow through with an activity result in encouragement or success, a healthy sense of control develops, supporting persistence, problem solving, and optimism about one’s ability to have an effect on the world. This drive to explore and have an effect is called “mastery motivation.” It can be measured in infants and young children by observing their behavior with a toy or other interesting challenge..

Children develop habitual ways of explaining their successes or failures in life, and those become unspoken assumptions that may affect their subsequent behavior.

Some researchers proposed that the optimistic and pessimistic behavior could be understood by primary and secondary control. Primary control involves direct action taken by the child to change his or her situation ot outcome (behavioral control). Secondary control involves indirect or passive ways of influencing the situation (cognitive control). According to Rothbaum (1982), secondary control can include predictive control (changing expectations or attributions of success). Il-lusory control (relying on luck or fate), vicarious control (relying on powerful others), and interpretive control (understanding and deriving meaning from the situation). It appears that children and adolescents that rely more heavily on primary control are more likely to show a strong association between perceived control and optimistic bias. Studies exhibited a stronger correlation between optimistic bias and control. Personal responsibility and control is deeply integrated and related to coping skills and health decision, (Klein and HelwegLarsen, 2001).

Control is expressed as a tendency to feel and act as if one is influential (rather than helpless).Individuals with an internal LC believe their reinforcements are contingent on their own behavior, capacities, and attributes. External LC individuals believe their reinforcements are under the control of powerful others, luck, or fate (Rotter, 1966). Internal Individuals possess a pervasive, enduring feeling of confidence that one is internal and external Environments are predictable and that there is a high probability that all things will work out as well as can be expected dependent on their own efforts (Brownell, 1991). This implies the perception of oneself as having a definite influence on life events through the exercise of imagination, skill, knowledge, and choice. Internal LC individuals also tend to have higher achievement motivation, be more purposeful and goal-directed, be more extroverted, sociable, active, and less neurotic and dogmatic than externals. LC is a strong positive correlate of mental strain. Externals tend to report more negative moods when faced with stressful events. Internals tend to receive less stress, and have better coping skills (Buntrock & Reddy, 1992).

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Data from the current study suggest that boys more optimistic than girls, and female higher than male in external locus of control. The findings of this study indicated that there was significant and positive correlation between optimism and Internal control, additionally, between pessimism and external control on one hand, and between pessimism and unknown control on the other hand. Furthermore, it has been found a negative and significant correlation between pessimism and internal control and between optimism and unknown control. It should be mentioned that Korn, Sharot, and Walter, (2014) concluded : " As initially hypothesized, realistic beliefs and predictions about the self are thought to have an adverse effect on wellbeing and functioning, and optimistic ones are shown to be psychologically adaptive in some circumstances. For instance, differently from healthy controls, people with major depressive disorder how no optimistic bias when they update their beliefs about the likelihood of an unpleasant life event happening to them in the light of relevant statistical information".

The above data and findings says that, another issue for further investigation is whether specific aspects of situations/ environments and developmental tasks of children and adolescents influence the components of personality and traits optimism-pessimism and locus of control. If such correlation between optimism-pessimism and dimensions of locus of control established, then systematic manipulation might extend the present correlational research to experimentally controlled researches. It is not clear in what causal direction the correlation between optimism-pessimism and dimensions of locus of control, we recommend to further research's to investigate the causal relationship between these psychological variables. Furthermore, the findings of such studies lead to clinical implications in counseling psychology and family counseling programs for children and adolescents in schools. It is very significant to explore optimism/pessimism, locus of control and its relationship with personality traits and pathology, on one hand, and with developmental tasks in childhood, on the other hand.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The researcher would like to thank teachers and psychological counselors for their assistance in conducting this study, and for implicating of the measures in the schools, and to the all children who participated in the study.

REFERENCES

1. Abdel Khaleq AM. (2000). Optimism and Pessimism: Arabic Studies Presentation. Psychology Journal. 57(14): 6-27.
2. Abdel Latif H and Hamada L. (1998). Optimism, Pessimism, and their Relationship to the Personality Two Dimensions (Extroversion and Psychosis). Educational Journal. 36(1): 83-104.
3. Al-Ansari B. (2002). Preparation of an Arabic Image of the Scale for Life Orientation as an Optimism Scale. Social Sciences Journal. 30(4): 757-812
4. Al-Ansari B. (2003). Optimism and Pessimism: There Measurement and Relationships with Certain Personality Variables among Kuwait University Students. Al-Resala, 192, 23rd Year Book, Scientific Publication Council, University of Kuwait, Kuwait.
5. Al-Anzi FO. (2001). Feeling Happy and its Relationship to Certain Personality Traits: A Comparative Correlation Study, Comparing between Males and Females. Psychological Studies Journal, 11, 3, 351-337.
6. Al-Hajjar, M. (1989). Contemporary Behavioral Medicine, Research in the Most Important Medical Psychology and Behavioral Therapy. Dar-el-Malayeen, Beirut.
7. Al-Mash'an, O. S. (2000). Optimism, Pessimism, and their Relationships to the Psychological and Physical Disorders and Life Event Pressures with the University Student. Psychological Studies, 10, 505-532.
8. Alloy LB, Abramson LY, Whitehouse WG, Hogan ME, et .(2006). Prospective incidence of first onsets and recurrences of depression in individuals at high and low cognitive risk for depression. Journal of Abnormal Psychology. 115(1): 145-156.
9. Batabyal, A and Nijkamp, P. (2017). On Pessimism and Optimism by Forward Looking Agents and the Need for Social Security. RIT Economics Department Working Paper No. 17-1.
10. Bedel, E. F.(2015).Assessing locus of control by gender and learning styles in pre-service early childhood education students. International Journal of Education and Research, 3, 1, 53-64.
11. Boman, P. (2001). Optimism, Hostility and Adjustment in First Year of High School. Educational Research Journal. 29(2): 777-807.
12. Brownell KD. (1991) personal responsibility and control over our bodies: when expectation exceeds reality. Health Psychology. 10(5): 303-310.
13. Buntrock CN and Reddy DM. (1992). Coping dispositions and the stress appraisal process. Personality and Individual Differences, 13(11): 1223-1231.
14. Campis LK, Lyman RD and Prentice-Dunn S. (1986). The parenting locus of control scale: Development and validation. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology. 15(3): 260-267.
15. Clark A. (1997). Being there: Putting brain, body and world together again. Cambridge.
16. Dillenberger D, Postlewaite A and Rozen K. (2017). Optimism and pessimism with expected utility.Journal of the European Economic Association 2017 00(0): 1-18.
17. Fogas BS, Wolchik SA, Braver SL, Freedom DS, et al. (1992). Locus Of control as a mediator of negative divorce related events and adjustment problems in children. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. 62(4): 589-598
18. Jacobson, B. (2008). Are Men More Optimistic? New American Economic Review. 93(1):193-215.
19. Hinz A, Sander C, Glaesmer H, Brahler E, et al. ( 2017). Optimism and pessimism in the general population: Psychometric properties of the Life Orientation Test (LOT-R). International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology. 17(2): 161-170.
20. Hoorens V, Damme C, Helweg-Larsen M and Sedikides C. (2017). The hubris hypothesis: The downside of comparative optimism displays. Consciousness and Cognition. 50: 45-55.
21. Guarnera S and Williams R. (1987). Optimism and locus of control for health and affiliation among elderly adults. Journal of Gerontology. 42(6): 594-595.
22. Ismail A. (2001). Optimism, Pessimism, and Certain Psychological Variables with Sample of Umm-el-Qura University Students. Educational Journal. 60(15): 51-81.
23. Klein CTF and Helweg-Larsen M. (2002). Perceived control and the optimistic bias: A meta-analytic review. Psychology and health. 17(4): 437-446.
24. Kokkinos CM and Logginidou E. (2007). Perceived parental rearing behaviors among elementary school children involved in bullying and victimization. Paper presented at the 27thInternational School Psychology Association (ISPA) Colloquium, Athens. 10(3): 281-301.
25. Korn CW, Sharot T, Walter H, Heekeren HR, et al. (2014). Depression is related to an absence of optimistically biased belief updating about future life events. Psychol Med. 44(3): 579-592.
26. Lennings CJ. (2000). Optimism, satisfaction and time perspective in the Elderly. International Journal of Aging Human Development. 51(3): 167-181.
27. Makri-Botsari E. (2001). How I perceive myself II. Questionnaire for the assessment of self-perception and selfesteem of upper elementary school students. Greek Edition of the Self-Perception Profile for Children (Harter). Athens: Ellinika Grammata.
28. Mahasnehm A, Al-Zoubi Z and Batayeneh O. (2013). The Relationship between Optimism-Pessimism and Personality Traits among Students in the Hashemite University International Education Studies. 6(8).
29. Maruta T, Colligan RC, Malinchoc M and Offord KP. (2000). Optimists vs. pessimists: Survival rate among medical patients over a 30-year period. Mayo Clinical Proceedings. 75(2): 140-143.
30. Massachusetts: MIT Press. Clolinger, S. C. (2000). Theories of Personality. Prentice Hall.
31. Elizabeth Scott, M. (2007). How an internal locus of control Lead to stress relief. New York.
32. Peacock E and Wong P. (1996). Anticipatory stress" The relation of locus of control, optimism and control appraisals to coping. Journal of Research in Personality. 30(2): 204-222
33. O'Connor RC and Cassidy C. (2007). Predicting hopelessness: The interaction between optimism/pessimism and specific future expectancies. Journal of Cognition and Emotion. 21(3): 596-613.
34. Rigby K. (1993). Schoolchildren's perceptions of their families and parents as a function of peer relations. Journal of Genetic Psychology. 154(4): 501-513.
35. Redwan S. (2001). Depression and Pessimism: A Comparative Correlation Study. Educational and Psychological Journal. 2(1): 13-48.
36. Rotter JB. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs. 80(1): 1-28.
37. Segerstrom SC. (1996). Perceptions of stress and control in the first semester of law school. Willamette Law Review. 32(3): 593-608.
38. Seligman ME, Nolen NP, Hochsem AN, Thomson N et al. (1990). Heamed Optimism. New York: Norton.
39. Seligman, M. E. P. (1990). Learned optimism. New York: Pocket Books.
40. Seligman M. E. P. (1991). Learned optimism. New York: Knopf.
41. Singh S and Mansi N. (2009). Psychological capital as predictor of psychological well-being. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology. 35(2): 233-238
42. Singh S and Mishra S. (2012). Optimism-pessimism among adolescents-A gender based study. Journal of Science and Research, ISSN (online). 2319-7064.
43. Padhy M, Chelli K & Padiri R. (2015). Optimism and psychological well-being. Sage Publication. 5(2).
44. (2017). WHO. Optimism and pessimism: global view.
45. Yates SM. (2000). Student optimism, pessimism, motivation and achievement in mathematics: A longitudinal study. In: T. Nakahara, & M. Koyama (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 14(1): 297-304.