Unrealistic optimism in health beliefs

Unrealistic optimism is a cognitive bias where individuals believe that negative events, such as developing a serious illness, are less likely to happen to them compared to others, while positive events are more likely. This belief can lead people to feel invulnerable, causing them to ignore health advice and engage in risky behaviours. As a result, it acts as a barrier to changing unhealthy habits because personal risk is underestimated.

Research on unrealistic optimism: Weinstein (1980)

Weinstein's study explored how people perceive their likelihood of experiencing life events compared to others, focusing on unrealistic optimism for negative events.

Method

• Participants were American college students who estimated their chances of around 42 life events (18 positive, 24 negative) compared to classmates of the same sex.
• Events were rated on a scale indicating likelihood, ranging from 100% less likely to 100% more likely.
• A separate group of female students rated events for controllability, desirability, and personal experience, estimating the percentage probability of each event occurring to university students.

Results

• For the vast majority of events, participants showed unrealistic optimism: positive events were seen as more likely for themselves, negative events as less likely.
• Exceptions included not being ill all winter, where no significant optimism was found.
• Optimism was stronger for controllable negative events, with participants holding stereotypical views of who experiences them, deeming themselves at lower risk.
• A positive correlation existed between positive events and perceived likelihood.

Conclusions

• Unrealistic optimism appears when events are perceived as controllable and individuals have emotional investment in the outcome.
• This bias can explain why people ignore health risks, as they believe they are less susceptible.

Positive psychology and wellbeing

Positive psychology, pioneered by Martin Seligman in the 1990s, shifts focus from mental ill-health to happiness and wellbeing. It adopts a free will perspective, emphasising that individuals can control their own lives and happiness. This approach encourages building strengths rather than just fixing weaknesses.

Components of a happy life

Positive psychology outlines three levels of living that contribute to overall happiness, each focusing on different aspects of positivity.

Research on positive psychology: Seligman (2004)

Seligman's work introduced practical applications of positive psychology through a multi-week course, aiming to boost happiness via real-world tasks.

Method

• The course involved university students reviewing scientific literature on happiness aspects: the past (contentment and satisfaction), present (joy, comfort, and pleasure), and future (optimism, hope, trust, and faith).
• Topics included depressive realism (where unhappy people have more accurate life perceptions) and how major life changes affect happiness.
• Homework assignments encouraged practising optimism to improve health and productivity.

Procedure

• Gratitude night - Students hosted events to thank family and friends, as gratitude boosts happiness.
• Pleasurable day - Participants planned enjoyable activities, practising savouring (sharing good experiences with others, through memories and mementos) and mindfulness (being in the moment and slowing down).
• Signature strengths - Using the Values in Action (VIA) questionnaire, students identified their top five strengths out of 24 and applied them to boring tasks.
• Meaningful life activities - Included creating a family tree with VIA questionnaires completed by family members, mentoring younger students, writing a positive vision for the future of humankind, and composing their own obituary from the viewpoint of their future grandchildren.

Conclusions

These interventions promote lasting happiness by focusing on strengths and positive actions, rather than just addressing negatives.

Key study on positive psychology interventions: Shoshani and Steinmetz (2014)

This longitudinal study examined the long-term effects of a positive psychology programme on middle school students' mental health.

Aims

• To assess if a positive psychology intervention improved mental health outcomes throughout middle school compared to a control group.
• To explore if sociodemographic factors, like gender, influenced the intervention's effectiveness.

Method

• A longitudinal field experiment with a mixed design: independent measures (intervention vs. control groups) and repeated measures (pre- and post-intervention assessments).
• Sample included over a thousand Israeli students aged in their early to mid-teens from two schools (with approximately half in the intervention group and half in the control group).
• Data collected via self-report questionnaires on psychological distress, depression, and optimism.

Procedure

• Intervention group - Teachers trained in positive psychology delivered lessons with activities like discussions, poems, stories, and videos. Students practised gratitude by listing weekly positives and writing gratitude letters.
• Control group - Received standard social science lessons on adolescent issues.
• The programme ran for an academic year, with follow-ups for a couple of years.

Results

• Both groups started with slightly worse than expected mental health levels.
• Post-intervention: the intervention group showed significant decreases in psychological distress and depression, plus significant increases in optimism.
• The control group experienced increased poor mental health symptoms.
• Effects were consistent across sociodemographic factors, benefiting both low- and high-risk students.

Conclusions

Positive psychology interventions have lasting benefits for mental health in adolescents, effective regardless of risk level.

Limitations

Ethical concerns arose as the control group (wait list) delayed access to the programme, and some older students missed it entirely due to moving schools.

Evaluation of research on health beliefs

Research into unrealistic optimism and positive psychology provides valuable insights but has strengths and limitations.

Strengths

• Longitudinal design - In Shoshani and Steinmetz (2014), the intervention running for one year with follow-ups over a two-year period allowed assessment of longer-term effects, unlike short-term studies.
• Use of psychometrics - Standardised self-report measures in Weinstein (1980) and Shoshani and Steinmetz enabled objective, replicable data on concepts like optimism and wellbeing.

Weaknesses

• Validity issues - Self-report tools, such as Seligman's VIA questionnaire, may lead to socially desirable responses, reducing data accuracy. In Shoshani and Steinmetz, repeated questionnaires could create participant expectations, where students guess desired answers.
• Generalisability - Weinstein's sample was limited to American college students, so findings may not apply to other ages or cultures. Shoshani and Steinmetz focused on Israeli middle schools, potentially limiting applicability to older teens or different cultural contexts.

Issues and debates in changing health beliefs

Broader considerations highlight how individual and situational factors interact in health beliefs.

Individual versus situational explanations

• Situational explanations emphasise external factors like strong social networks or faith in boosting happiness (e.g., Myers and Diener, 1995).
• However, this overlooks individual factors, such as how chronically ill people may need to acknowledge negatives to adjust behaviours effectively.

Cultural differences

Studies like Shoshani and Steinmetz (2014) were conducted in Israeli schools, so results may not transfer to other cultures and other types of school.