Abstract: Hope and optimism are two of the most widely researched concepts within Positive Psychology. They are trait-like thoughts about future and two kinds of future-oriented positive expectations. In fact, research found good relation between hope and optimism, suggesting substantial overlap between the two constructs. Considering that, how should we best conceptualize them? Are they separate constructs, or do they reflect the same global underlying trait? A series of studies suggest that though hope and optimism have a lot of conceptual overlap, they are two essentially different concepts. Most often, hope involves thoughts about one’s goals, including the ability to generate routes to reach goals (i.e., pathways) and the motivation to use those routes (i.e., agency); while optimism is closely relate to future orientation and defined as a stable predisposition to “believe that good rather than bad things will happen”. The core concept of hope is the goal-centered agency thought and pathways thought, while the core concept of optimism is the future-oriented positive expectancy. As a consequence, the ultimate choice between distinguishing or merging hope and optimism may well depend on whether the researcher seeks to maximize predictive accuracy or simply to summarize individuals’ future orientation. As two kinds of future-oriented positive expectancy, hope and optimism are viewed as personality traits, and share a common element: beliefs about goals, but they have divergence on the way of expecting for the future and the personal control of anticipated events. Specifically hope is related directly to the personal attainment of a specific goal, whereas optimism focuses more broadly on the expected quality of future outcomes in general. The agency of hope is similar to Bandura's efficacy expectancies and pathway is similar to outcome expectancies; while optimism is similar to outcome expectancies. Optimism theory posits that outcome expectancies determine goal-directed behavior, whereas hope theory posits that efficacy expectancies (agency) are equally necessary determinants of goal-directed behavior. There are two completely opposite views on the personal control of hope and optimism to anticipated events. One believes that optimists have a greater personal control of anticipated events than those have higher hope levels. Yet another view holds that those have higher hope levels have a greater personal control of anticipated events, and higher hope levels may represent a more internal dominant locus of control, while optimists represent an external dominant locus of control. Related studies find that, compared to optimism, hope is usually a better predictor of subjective well-being and academic achievement. Future researches should pay more attention to: (1) whether hope and optimism can integrate to an overarching trait called goal attitude? (2) To verify whether locus of control plays a moderating role in the study of hope and optimism? (3) Conduct more cross-cultural and localization studies in Eastern culture, especially the applicability of existing research conclusion in Chinese population.

Key words: positive psychology, hope, optimism, future orientation, positive expectancy

摘要： 在积极心理学中，希望和乐观虽然存在很大程度的概念重叠，但二者本质上是不同的概念。希望的概念核心是以目标为中心的动力思维和路径思维，乐观的概念核心是指向未来的积极预期。作为两种指向未来的积极预期，希望和乐观属于人格特质的范畴，共同成分是对目标的信念；二者的差异性在于对未来预期的方式和对预期事件的个人控制。相关研究发现，相对于乐观，希望通常是主观幸福感和学业成就更好的预测指标。未来研究应明确希望和乐观的整合，验证是否存在控制点的调节作用，并开展跨文化研究。

关键词: 积极心理学, 希望, 乐观, 未来指向, 积极预期