Turning Lemons into Lemonade: Hardiness Helps People Turn Stressful Circumstances into Opportunities

Research shows hardiness is the key to the resiliency for not only surviving, but also thriving, under stress. Hardiness enhances performance, leadership, conduct, stamina, mood and both physical and mental health.

Findings

Why do some people suffer physical and mental breakdowns when faced with overwhelming stress while others seem to thrive? A landmark 12-year longitudinal study by psychologist Salvatore R. Maddi, Ph.D., and colleagues at the University of Chicago involving one of the biggest deregulation and divestiture cases in American history provides some answers.

In 1981 Illinois Bell Telephone (IBT) downsized from 26,000 employees to just over half that many in one year. The remaining employees faced changing job descriptions, company goals and supervisors. One manager reported having 10 different supervisors in one year. Dr. Maddi and his research team were already studying more than 400 supervisors, managers and executives at IBT before the downsizing occurred and they were able to continue following the original study group on a yearly basis until 1987. Results shows that about two-thirds of the employees in the study suffered significant performance, leadership and health declines as the result of the extreme stress from the deregulation and divestiture, including heart attacks, strokes, obesity, depression, substance abuse and poor performance reviews. However, the other one-third actually thrived during the upheaval despite experiencing the same amount of disruption and stressful events as their co-workers. These employees maintained their health, happiness and performance and felt renewed enthusiasm.

What made the two groups so different? Dr. Maddi found that those who thrived maintained three key beliefs that helped them turn adversity into an advantage: commitment, control and challenge attitudes. The Commitment attitude led them to strive to be involved in ongoing events, rather than feeling isolated. The Control attitude led them to struggle and try to influence outcomes, rather than lapse into passivity and powerlessness. The Challenge attitude led them to view stress changes, whether positive or negative, as opportunities for new learning.

There is no more extreme example of workplace stress than the battlefield. Research by psychologist Paul T. Bartone, Ph.D., of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point found that hardiness protected Army reserve personnel mobilized for the Persian Gulf War in the early 1990’s. In this study, the higher the hardiness level, the greater the ability of soldiers to experience life- and combat-related stress without apparent negative health consequences, such as post traumatic stress disorder or depression. So, hardiness at least partially explains why some soldiers remain healthy under war related stress.

Significance

Results from the IBT study and other research shows that hardiness enhances performance, leadership, conduct, stamina, mood and both physical and mental health by giving people the courage and capability to turn adversity to advantage.

Practical Application

Dr. Maddi and his team used what they learned in the IBT case to develop a training program to help stressed-out employees, including those still at IBT. Those that took part in the training program reduced their anxiety, depression and other signs of strain, while increasing their job satisfaction and morale. These changes persisted after the training course was over. The training program, offered through the Hardiness Institute, is now widely used by organizations to improve worker performance and health. The company also offers an assessment test that is currently used in screening applicants for jobs (such as the U.S. Navy Seals) and placing employees in the right positions. In addition, the institute offers a training program for students that motivates them to do well, and to stay in and graduate from school.

Hardiness and resiliency research is also being used by the American Psychological Association (APA) to help children, teenagers and adults to adapt well to adversity, trauma, tragedy, threats and other significant sources of stress. In the fall of 2003, the APA launched “Resilience for Kids & Teens,” a school-based campaign which focuses on teaching the skills of resilience for problems ranging from adapting to a new classroom to bullying by classmates or even abuse at home. The campaign included the distribution of a special issue of Time for Kids Magazine to more than two million fourth- through sixth-graders and their teachers to help children learn the skills of resilience, using “kid-friendly” language.

The APA has also partnered with the Discovery Health Channel for a national, multi-media campaign designed to help Americans work through personal tragedies by learning strategies for resilience. The partnership was forged in the wake of the September 11th 2001 tragedy.

Cited Research

Bartone, P. T. (1999). Hardiness protects against war-related stress in army reserve forces. Consulting Psychology Journal, Vol. 51, pp. 72-82.

Khoshaba, D. M. & Maddi, S. R. (2001). HardiTraining. Newport Beach, CA: Hardiness Institute.

Maddi, S. R. (1987). Hardiness training at Illinois Bell Telephone. In J. P. Opatz (Ed.), Health promotion evaluation, pp. 101-1115. Stevens Point, WI: National Wellness Institute.

Maddi, S. R. (2002). The story of hardiness: Twenty years of theorizing, research and practice. Consulting Psychology Journal, Vol. 54, pp. 173-185.

Maddi, S. R. & Khoshaba, D. M. (2001). HardiSurvey III-R: Test development and internet instruction manual. Newport Beach, CA: Hardiness Institute.


American Psychological Association, December 22, 2003

Posted in News & updates | Leave a comment

Find a Psyhcologist LInk

http://locator.apa.org/?_ga=1.193419566.2056075816.1460196452

Posted in News & updates | Leave a comment

Emotional regulation tools for children link

http://www.apa.org/pubs/magination/flash/441B129.swf

Posted in News & updates | Leave a comment

How to Achieve Mindfulness in 30 Minutes:

How to Achieve Mindfulness in 30 Minutes (and Finally Get What All the Hype Is About)

Source from http://www.mentalhealthsupportcommunity.com and mindfulness site

Posted in News & updates | Leave a comment

Borderline or Bipolar Objective Data

When a patient presents with episodes of depression, irritability, and emotional lability (especially tears and anger, with rapid changes), might he or she have borderline personality disorder (BPD)? Or could it be rapid cycling bipolar disorder (BD)?

Although there are other possibilities, such as substance use, differentiating these 2 common conditions can be extremely difficult. DSM criteria have a roughly 90% overlap: only 2 DSM criteria features are clearly present in one and absent in the other: namely, abandonment fear and chronic emptiness.1

Indeed, Deltito and colleagues,2 as well as others, have argued that borderlinity is just another version of bipolarity or at least that the “broadening of the bipolar diagnosis to include a spectrum of poorly defined conditions has added to the plausibility of this idea.”3 In refutation of this notion, data that demonstrate a clear difference between the 2 conditions, involving interpersonal trust, have recently been published.3

Prisoner’s Dilemma
The social psychology research tool called Prisoner’s Dilemma is likely familiar to most readers.4 Briefly: imagine that 2 criminals are caught simultaneously. If both cooperate with one another and tell the same false story, each can get off with a light sentence. But if one finks on the other (dubbed “Defect”), he gets off scot-free while the other takes the rap. However, if both defect, both are punished.

This has been modeled in a game of cooperation. If both player and partner cooperate, each earns 40 pence. If both defect, each earns only 20 pence. But if one defects while the other cooperates, the defector earns 70 pence and the cooperator, nothing: he is punished for cooperating with a defector, whose score is actually better than could be achieved through mutual cooperation.

When one sits down with a patient and within 5 minutes is aware of something odd going on, whether that is excessive praise or an unwarranted devaluation or simply a sort of “latching on”: these feelings are data.

If such a game is played between 2 partners, just once, the best strategy is to defect: it limits losses. But if the game is played repeatedly, the best strategy in most circumstances is called “tit-for-tat”: play cooperation first and then follow the move of your partner. If he cooperates, do likewise. When he defects, also do likewise and continue thus until he plays cooperate—then follow that move as well.

The result is a test of willingness to cooperate. When euthymic bipolar patients played (ostensibly with another person, though the actual partner was a computer), they made choices very like control patients, choosing to cooperate almost 75% of the time. But patients with BPD cooperated only about 50% of the time (ANOVA difference, P = .03).

This is not a clinical tool: first of all, separation between the 2 groups was far from 100%. Second, iterative Prisoner’s Dilemma is not easily administered, even by computer. The point of this research is that an objectively measurable difference between BD and BPD was evident.
Conclusions: (1) these 2 conditions are not variations within a species—they are different (though perhaps related) animals; and (2) the difference observed mirrors what we see clinically, namely an impairment in relationship.

Some might regard this as another instance in which social psychology goes to great lengths to prove an accepted observation (as remarked way back in 1918: “. . . for more than 20 years I have been searching for one fact . . . discovered in a psychological laboratory which did not repeat what we already knew”5). But given the degree of controversy about the bipolar/borderline distinction, this finding seems worth passing along.

When one sits down with a patient and within 5 minutes is aware of something odd going on, whether that is excessive praise or an unwarranted devaluation or simply a sort of “latching on”: these feelings are data. Something is amiss in the social exchange. For example, you play Cooperate, he plays Defect, even after several overtures. In this context, your clinical hunch has been supported: BD may or may not be present, but the probability of borderlinity has gone up.

Acknowledgment: Thanks to our esteemed Samaritan Health Services librarian Ken Willer for access to articles like this when the ink is barely dry—JP.

LOL

 

 

Posted in News & updates | Leave a comment