After determining that what I was ultimately dealing with was a underlying belief of “learned helplessness” (pessimism), I decided to purchase Martin Seligman‘s book entitled “Learned Optimism: How to Change Your Mind and Your Life.” Within the first fifty pages of the book is a “test” that explores the degree of pessimism one possesses. While the overall results were not surprising to me (“average” to “moderately pessimistic”), I found Seligman’s framework for understanding the degree of pessimism very interesting.
According to John Teasdale, Seligman’s colleague, the premise behind one’s degree of helplessness ultimately boils down to the manner in which one explains bad events; this is known as one’s explanatory style. Seligman outlines three dimensions to one’s explanatory style:
- Permanence – How long does someone give up after failing? Explanations that are more temporary in scope translates into increased resilience – i.e. “This failure is just a minor setback. What’s next?”
- Pervasiveness – Does someone utilize universal or specific explanations for their failure(s)? Those that employ a universal perspective for their failures give up on everything, while those that describe their failures using specifics can compartmentalize their failures in one area and progress naturally in others.
- Personalization – Does the individual blame themselves for their failures or the circumstances? Those that internalize their failures tend to have a lower self-esteem than those who place blame on external circumstances.
Not surprisingly, the test is structured around these three dimensions. Below is a more detailed view of my results:
Permanence – I have a tendency to think about bad things using extreme descriptors (always, never, etc.). When good things happen, I tend to believe that these events are not long lasting, but they are also not necessarily fleeting.
Pervasiveness – I tend to believe that bad events have specific causes, and are thus not universal in breadth. I also believe that good events enhance everything that I do.
Personalization – I fall in the middle of blaming myself and external circumstances for my failures. However, when I believe that I cause good things to happen, my self-esteem is much higher than the average person.
Overall, when bad things occur, I’m moderately pessimistic and when good events occur, I am just the opposite. If you guess that this is “average”, you are correct. So, perhaps the problem of pessimism or “learned helplessness” isn’t to the degree that I had imagined – or is it?
When one experiences a stream of continuous failures, one’s ability to remain optimistic becomes more difficult. While there are those that have “bulletproof” levels of optimism, I unfortunately do not currently fall in this category – at least not yet.
Crises that I can “plan” for (e.g. burglary, fire, etc.) are easier for me to maintain a high level of optimism than those that I cannot foresee. Since there will be many challenges that will not display a “early warning signal”, my main challenge is to learn how to develop the skills necessary (i.e. an enhanced explanatory style) to ensure my optimism remains high independent of the crisis encountered.