hope theory and suicide

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

This article was downloaded by: [University of Plymouth Library]On: 26 April 2011Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 934319204]Publisher RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Death StudiesPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713657620

Hope Theory: A Framework for Understanding Suicidal ActionParveen K. Grewala; James E. Portera

a University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, Canada

To cite this Article Grewal, Parveen K. and Porter, James E.(2007) 'Hope Theory: A Framework for Understanding SuicidalAction', Death Studies, 31: 2, 131 — 154To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/07481180601100491URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07481180601100491

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial orsystematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply ordistribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contentswill be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug dosesshould be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directlyor indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713657620

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07481180601100491

http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

HOPE THEORY: A FRAMEWORK FORUNDERSTANDING SUICIDAL ACTION

PARVEEN K. GREWAL and JAMES E. PORTER

University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, Canada

This article examines C. R. Snyder’s (1994, 2000a) theory of hope and its appli-cation for understanding suicide. Strengths, weaknesses, and gaps in the suicideliterature are outlined, and A. T. Beck’s theory of hopelessness is compared withSnyder’s hope theory. Hope theory constructs are used to examine the relationshipof suicide to hope=hopelessness, goals, pathways thinking, and agency thinking.This critical review is intended to broaden our theoretical understanding of suicideand is meant to form the basis for future empirical investigation of suicide-relatedbehavior using the framework of hope theory. Implications for suicide preventionprograms and approaches to treating suicidal individuals are outlined.

Suicide is a tragic and perplexing phenomenon. Identifying the chainof causal events and factors that lead to the action of suicide is criti-cally important for prevention and intervention. Predicting suicide isdifficult, primarily because of the paucity of theoretically guidedinvestigations of suicide-related behavior (Neuringer, 1976; Rogers,2001, 2003). Many theories have been put forth to explain suicidalaction (Baumeister, 1990; Durkheim, 1951; Shneidman, 1985), butfew of these outline potential causal pathways to suicide (Cornette,Abramson, & Bardone, 2000). Some theories simply list potential riskfactors that are thought to be associated with suicide (Mann, Water-naux, Haas, & Malone, 1999), and other investigations are often onlycorrelational in nature (Santa Mina & Gallop, 1998). Despite theefforts of researchers, suicidology is filled with large gaps inknowledge, predominantly in the areas of theory and intervention(Joiner, 2000). Hope theory, introduced by C. R. Snyder (1994,2000a), will be explored and its applicability as a framework forunderstanding suicidal behavior will be examined.

Received 1 November 2005; accepted 10 April 2006.Address correspondence to Parveen K. Grewal, Department of Psychology, University

of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, Canada N9B 3P4. E-mail: [email protected]

131

Death Studies, 31: 131–154, 2007Copyright # Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 0748-1187 print/1091-7683 onlineDOI: 10.1080/07481180601100491

Downloaded By: [University of Plymouth Library] At: 11:56 26 April 2011

Suicide

Suicide, a leading cause of death, is a major public health problem.Each year, suicide has caused the death of nearly 30,000 Ameri-cans (Fiske, Gatz, & Hannell, 2005). The actual number of suicidedeaths may be considerably higher since determining the intent ofa death is difficult in some situations (Health Canada, 2002). Thesuicide rate in the United States, despite the misclassifications,remains unacceptably high.

Definitions

Suicide is an action and not an illness (Health Canada, 1994). Sui-cidology, the study of suicide, has been confused and stagnatedbecause of the lack of adequate standard definitions for suicidalbehavior (Kidd, 2003; O’Carroll et al., 1996). The terms suicide, sui-cide attempt, self-harming behavior, and parasuicide are used commonlyand sometimes interchangeably in the suicide literature (SantaMina & Gallop, 1998). Additionally, the terms are not applied uni-formly in research and practice (Kidd, 2003), making it difficult togeneralize findings and to extrapolate (Westefeld et al., 2000).

O’Carroll and colleagues (1996) proposed a nomenclature forsuicide-related behavior in attempt to solve this dilemma. Theydefine suicide as ‘‘death from injury, poisoning, or suffocationwhere there is evidence (either explicit or implicit) that the injurywas self-inflicted and that the decedent intended to kill him-self=herself’’ (p. 247). The definition for suicide attempt includesthe intent to kill oneself but the outcome of this potentially self-injurious behavior must be nonfatal. However, it is not necessaryfor injuries to have occurred in order for this behavior to be classi-fied as a suicide attempt. O’Carroll et al. also used the terms suici-dal act and suicide-related behavior to incorporate both suicide andsuicide attempt. In addition, they defined suicidal ideation as ‘‘anyself-reported thoughts of engaging in suicide-related behavior’’(p. 247). These definitions will be used in this article.

Risk Factors

A predominant focus in contemporary suicidology has beenthe identification of risk and protective factors that influence

132 P. K. Grewal and J. E. Porter


suicide-related behavior (Rogers, 2001). This focus has revealedvarious biological, psychological, sociological, and cultural vari-ables as contributors to the ultimate goal of suicide (Welch, 2001).

Depression has been identified as a strong predictor of suicidalaction. Many studies have shown that individuals who haveengaged in suicidal acts (Westefeld et al., 2000) or have indicatedsuicidal ideation (Brown & Vinokur, 2003) have high indices ofdepression, primarily assessed by depression scales (e.g., Beck’sDepression Inventory; Beck, Ward, Mendelson, Mock, & Erbaugh,1961). Depression has been identified as the most common psychi-atric disorder among individuals who have attempted suicide(Davis, 1995).

Although depression is a useful psychological construct forpredicting suicide (Beck, 1963, 1974), hopelessness, a cognitivevariable (Hughes & Neimeyer, 1993), may be a better indicatorof suicide-related behavior. In fact, hopelessness is found to corre-late better with suicidal ideation than depression (Wetzel, Margu-lies, Davis, & Karam, 1980) and is more precise at predictingeventual suicide than depression (Beck, Steer, Kovacs, & Garrison,1985).

Hope, Hopelessness and Suicide

What is Hope?

The significance of hope has been acknowledged for a very longtime (Snyder et al., 1991). An early stream of psychological andpsychiatric literature described hope as positive expectations forgoal attainment (Menninger, 1959; Stotland, 1969), and high-lighted the role of hope in human adaptation (Magaletta & Oliver,1999). French (1952) and Menninger (1959), for example, notedthe importance of hope in initiating therapeutic change, willing-ness to learn, and a sense of well-being.

Although intuitively one would describe hope in terms ofemotion, the bulk of the literature uses a cognitive approach tounderstanding and explaining the construct of hope (Lopez,Snyder, & Teramoto-Pedrotti, 2003). Recent literature hasstrengthened our understanding of hope by emphasizing theimportance of goals. Generally, hope is thought to be a unidimen-sional construct involving an overall perception that goals can be

Hope Theory and Suicide 133


met (e.g., Melges & Bowlby, 1969; Stotland, 1969). Consequently,greater hope is generally associated with positive physical andmental health outcomes (e.g., hope is a moderator of stress onphysical health; Gottschalk, 1985). Although the previous concep-tualizations of hope are founded on the assumption that goaldirectedness is adaptive, the literature does not clearly detail themeans by which goals are pursued (Snyder et al., 1991) and doesnot make use of a developmental model to explain the linkbetween hope and well-being.

Beck’s Hopelessness Construct and Suicide

Hopelessness has been put forward as a significant risk factor not onlyof mental disorders generally, but specifically of depression and sui-cidal behaviors (Hanna, 1991). Beck (1963, 1974) identified threecognitive features of depression—a negative view of the self, a nega-tive view of the self in relation to the world, and a negative view of theself in relation to the future. Hopelessness, which Beck defined as‘‘negative cognitions about the future’’ (Beck, Kovacs, & Weissman,1975), represents the third cognitive feature of depression.

In order to measure hopelessness, Beck, Weissman, Lester,and Trexler (1974) developed the Beck Hopelessness Scale(BHS). This scale contains 20 true=false items (e.g., ‘‘My futureseems dark to me’’, ‘‘I can look forward to more good times thanbad times’’ and ‘‘I don’t expect to get what I really want’’), withhigher scores reflecting greater hopelessness. The internal consist-ency, measured by coefficient alpha, was .93 (Beck et al., 1974),and correlations between BHS scores and selected MMPI-2 scalesattest to its convergent and discriminant validity (Thackston-Hawkins, Compton, & Kelly, 1994). The BHS measures three fac-tors, ‘‘feelings about the future’’, ‘‘loss of motivation’’, and ‘‘futureexpectations’’ (Beck et al., 1974).

According to Beck and colleagues (1975), hopelessness is avaluable construct for the assessment, understanding, and predic-tion of suicidal behavior. In fact, hopelessness, as assessed bythe BHS, has been strongly linked empirically with suicidal idea-tion (Holden, Mendonca, & Mazmanian, 1985), suicide attempts(Salter & Platt, 1990), and completed suicides (Beck, Brown,Berchick, Stewart & Steer, 1990; Beck, Brown & Steer, 1989).



The identification of the relationship between hopelessnessand suicidal behavior has been an important discovery in suicidol-ogy, advancing our understanding of the relationship betweendepression and suicidal behavior. Beck (1963) considered hope-lessness to be the key factor in connecting depression and suicide.Research has revealed that the construct of hopelessness plays asignificant role in the etiology and maintenance of depression(Beck et al., 1989; Salter & Platt, 1990). Hopelessness not only pre-dicts various indices of suicide potential, but also has been shownto mediate the indirect relationship between depression and suici-dal behavior (Beck et al., 1975; Beck et al., 1990; Petrie &Chamberlain, 1983). In fact, some studies reveal that the corre-lation between suicidal ideation and depression becomes nonsigni-ficant when the effect of hopelessness is controlled for (Beck et al.,1975; Wetzel et al., 1980).

Criticisms of Beck’s View of Hopelessness

Despite the advancements Beck has made to our understanding ofhopelessness and suicide, his work is not without critics. Beck’sconceptualization of the hopelessness construct is unclear, andthe BHS presents problems for measuring and defining hopeless-ness. Beck and his colleagues concentrated solely on delineatingthe concept of ‘‘hopelessness’’ rather than hope. Gottschalk(1974) treated hope and hopelessness as the inverse of one anotheron a single continuum related to expectations of the future, but‘‘Beck only partially explained the construct and made no explicitassumption as to the dimensionality of hopelessness’’ (Glanz, Haas,& Sweeney, 1995, p. 51). As a result, the BHS merely measures thedegree of hopelessness, and ‘‘makes no claim that low scores rep-resent high hope, only that they reflect the absence of hopeless-ness’’ (Glanz et al., 1995, p. 51). These fuzzy definitions lead toconfusion.

Another issue of concern is whether Beck’s hopelessness con-struct is an enduring personality trait or a transient state of mind(Glanz et al., 1995). Beck (1986) has asserted that, as measuredby the BHS, hopelessness has aspects of both a state and a trait.He asserts that the BHS scores of an individual have a tendencyto reach similar levels of hopelessness during episodes of acutedepression but decline in between episodes, thus having both state



and trait characteristics. However, this area remains unclear andproblematic (Glanz et al., 1995). Furthermore, Rogers (2001) hascritiqued Beck’s work by describing it as theorizing at a microlevel.He claimed that, although Beck and colleagues (1975) have con-nected hopelessness with one of the three cognitive features ofdepression, the construct of hopelessness remains relatively disen-gaged theoretically from many identified suicide risk factors otherthan depression. Rogers (2001) acknowledged the practical valueof the link between hopelessness and suicide but emphasized theneed for clarification of the mechanisms behind this association.

The construct of hopelessness, in addition, has been exclus-ively operationalized in the literature by one measure, the BHS(O’Connor, Connery, & Cheyne, 2000). The very relationshipbetween suicidal intent and negative views of the future contribu-ted directly to the development of this scale (Beck et al., 1974).Thus, the extent to which the scale reflects suicidality compromisesany relationships found between the BHS and suicidality. Beck andcolleagues (1974) also claimed that the BHS measures three factors,yet subsequent factor analyses have variously identified one factor(Aish & Wasserman, 2001), two factors (Tanaka, Sakamoto, Ono,Fujihara, & Kitamura, 1998), and more than three factors in theBHS (Young, Halper, Clark, Scheftner, & Fawcett, 1992). Aishand Wasserman (2001) even suggested one item, ‘‘my future seemsdark to me’’, could replace the entire scale. Moreover, Durham(1982) found that the reliability of the BHS scores was much higherfor psychiatric populations (.86 and .83) than for college students(.65), concluding that the BHS may not be suitable for non-clinicalpopulations. The BHS is also criticized for being vulnerableto response bias (Glanz et al., 1995), and specifically to socialdesirability bias, which could inflate its apparent validity and pre-cision in the assessment of hopelessness (Mendonca, Holden,Mazmanian, & Dolan, 1983). In fact, when social desirability iscontrolled for, the relationship between the BHS and suicide idea-tion has been found to be non-significant (Cole, 1988; Linehan &Nielsen, 1981).

The BHS has been a reliable and valid predictive tool forhopelessness-suicide research (Young et al, 1992), has exhibitedits clinical importance, and has remained virtually unchallengedin the assessment of hopelessness for many years. However, someargue that Beck’s hopelessness construct lacks conceptual clarity



beyond that originally postulated (MacLeod, Rose, & Williams,1993). It is also important to define hopelessness in at least oneother way to ensure that all the confirmatory tendencies of hope-lessness do not serve as ‘‘blinders to important facets of thephenomenon of suicide’’ (Rogers, 2001, p. 18). In order to addressthese criticisms, alternative measures for the assessment of hope-lessness are needed. Finally, a developmental model of hope isneeded to understand suicidal behavior, one that describes themeans by which goals are pursued, clearly defines the concept ofhope, links hopelessness to a multitude of known suicidal risk fac-tors, theorizes at a macrolevel, and uses a measure other than theBHS to operationalize hope.

Snyder’s Hope Theory

Hope theory, as introduced by C. R. Snyder (1994, 2000a), seeksto systematically explain the concept of hope. Snyder (2000b) sug-gested that hope is a more complex construct than previouslydescribed by other scholars. Snyder described hope as a bidimen-sional phenomenon, a thinking process that involves two funda-mental goal-directed components, agency and pathways (Snyder,1994; Snyder et al., 1991). Hope theory is anchored by the goal(Snyder, Cheavens, & Sympson, 1997). The agency componententails goal-directed determination, whereas the pathways compo-nent implies goal-directed planning (Snyder et al., 1991).

Goals, the core of hope theory, may vary on a number oflevels. Goals may be visual, virtual or verbal in nature, and mayvary temporally from short- to long-term (Snyder et al, 2000).Goals may also vary with respect to attainability, such that eventhe perceived ‘‘impossible’’ goal may be achieved through plan-ning and determination (Lopez et al., 2003). Goals may vary inimportance, although a given goal must be of at least moderateimportance before a person will pursue it (Snyder et al., 2000).An important principle of hope theory is that the expectation ofgoal attainment will be positively associated with greater levelsof both agentic and pathways thinking, which, in turn, will resultin greater psychological adjustment (e.g., greater life satisfaction,less dysphoria; Chang, 2003).

Agency thinking is the motivational component of hopetheory (Snyder, 1994). Agency reflects self-perceptions about one’s



capability to meet goals in the past, present, and future (Snyder,1994, 2000a). Agency is the ‘‘belief that one can begin and sustainmovement along the envisioned pathways toward a given goal’’(Snyder et al., 2000, p. 749). Individuals with high levels of hopeendorse agentic personal self-talk phrases (e.g., ‘‘I won’t giveup’’; Snyder, LaPointe, Crowson, & Early, 1998) Agency isespecially important in applying the motivation to the appropriatealternative pathways when confronted by impediments (Lopezet al., 2003). Pathways thinking reflects ‘‘the person’s perceived abil-ity to generate plausible routes to goals’’ (Snyder, 2000b, p. 13).Pathways thought also taps positive self-talk about being able tofind ways to desired outcomes (e.g., ‘‘I’ll find a way to solve this’’;Snyder et al., 1998). Individuals can usually generate at least oneprimary path to achieve a goal. Some, especially those with highhope, may produce multiple routes (Snyder, 2000b).

Unlike previous conceptualizations of hope that describe it asa unidimensional construct, Snyder proposed that two interrelateddimensions—agency and pathways—are necessary throughout thegoal-directed behavior and critical in defining hope. According toSnyder et al. (1991), ‘‘these two components of hope are reciprocal,additive, and positively related, although they are not synony-mous’’ (p. 571.). To sustain movement toward the goals in one’slife, both the sense of agency and the sense of pathways must beoperative (Snyder et al., 1991).

According to Snyder (1994), hopeful thought is an active pro-cess that is learned and is crucial for survival and thriving. Thedevelopment of hope begins early in life and is established duringthe infant and toddler stage. Newborns undertake pathways think-ing and begin to understand the process of causation that allowsevents to happen (Snyder, 1994, 2000a). This cause and effectthinking enables the child to conceptualize goals and pathwaysto reach them (Snyder, 1994, 2000a). By the time babies are a yearold, they are able to anticipate events and engage in intentionalacts (Snyder, 1998). Hopeful, goal-directed thinking is learned inthe context of other people (Snyder, 2002). Each child needsencouragement from caregivers and instruction on how to over-come impediments (Snyder, 1998). For the facilitation of hope, achild needs a secure attachment with one or more caregivers,who in turn need to provide a model for effective goal-relatedactivities (Snyder, 1994, 2000a). Agency develops when a child



learns that he or she can accomplish goals and then receives praiseand support in the pursuit of accomplishing age-appropriate tasks(McDermott & Snyder, 2000). Thus, the foundation of hope lies inthe ability to make linkages between desires and the ability touse strategies that fulfill those needs (Hinton-Nelson, Roberts, &Snyder, 1996).

Several factors may hinder the development of hope and areespecially damaging when encountered earlier in life (Snyder,1998). Negative events, such as childhood neglect and abuse, canharm the establishment of hope. Snyder (2002) posited thatneglected children lack someone to teach them to think hopefully.The neglected child, by definition, has the attention of no care-givers (Rieger, 1993). Hope cannot develop because the time spentwith caregivers is not attentive, interactive, or evocative (Snyder,1994). Neglect kills hopeful thinking in a passive manner, whereashope is destroyed actively through physical and sexual maltreat-ment (Snyder, 2002). In these situations, the caregiver’s actionsare no longer a source of stability or support, but instead causethe infant to shut down his or her goal-directed thinking (Snyder,1994, 2000a). Other events, such as parental loss or family suicide,may also have similar negative effects on hope. The hope thatdevelops during the first years of childhood becomes the templatefor the future and influences the remainder of the person’s life(Snyder, 1994, Snyder et al., 1991).

Snyder’s Hope Instruments

Snyder and his colleagues have developed and validated instru-ments that reflect their hope theory structure. The Hope Scale(HS; Snyder et al., 1991), measuring hope as a relatively stable per-sonality trait, consists of four agency items (e.g., ‘‘I energeticallypursue my goals’’), four pathways items (e.g., ‘‘There are lots ofways around any problem’’), and four distractor items. In complet-ing the items, respondents are asked to imagine themselves acrosstime and situation contexts. This brief self-report measure of hopehas been constructed with careful attention to psychometricproperties and used with various populations, including inpatients(Snyder et al., 1991). Cronbach alphas have ranged from .74 to .84for the total score (Lopez et al, 2003), and test–retest reliabilityhave been .80 or higher over time periods exceeding 10 weeks



(Snyder et al., 1991). In addition, a principal-components factoranalysis yielded a two-factor solution (Snyder et al., 1991), andthe HS appears to be relatively uninfluenced by social desirability(Hollorer & Snyder, 1990). The State Hope Scale (Snyder et al.,1996) assesses goal-directed thinking at a given moment in time.It has three agency items (e.g., ‘‘At the present time, I am energeti-cally pursuing my goal’’) and three pathways items (e.g., ‘‘I canthink of many ways to reach my current goals’’ ). Numerous studiesby Snyder and his colleagues support the internal reliability (alphasranging from .79 to .95), factor structure (two factors), and discrimi-nant validity of this instrument (Snyder, 2000b; Snyder et al., 1991;Snyder et al., 1996).

How Does Hope Theory Explain Suicide-RelatedBehavior?

Hope theory does not assess the desirability of the goals selectedby people (Snyder, 1994, 2000a). A goal does not have to be pro-social or positive (Snyder, 2002), or even societally condoned(Snyder, 2000b). Suicide, despite its negative nature, can be a goal.Snyder (1994) described suicide as the final act of hope (Snyder,1994). He suggested that when people have met ‘‘profound,chronic, and seemingly unending goal blockages, they may aban-don their usual life goals in favor of a suicide goal’’ (Snyder, 2002,p. 267).

Life Goals

Goals are an essential component of everyone’s daily lives (Snyder,1994, 2000a). People have many personal life goals they hold to beof high importance, ranging from interpersonal relationships tocareer-oriented goals (Snyder, 1994). Nevertheless, during thecourse of life, people often experience having their goalsobstructed (Snyder 1994, 2000a). Snyder explained that when cer-tain intended goals are met by failure, some individuals may aban-don some or all life goals. This is the first step toward adopting thegoal of suicide (Snyder, 1994, 2002).

Literature has revealed that the presence of life goals, assuggested by Snyder, mitigates against suicide. Individuals report-ing prior suicidal behavior have reported that they had fewer



important reasons for living when they were considering suicidethan they had when they were not considering suicide (Ivanoff,Jang, Smyth, & Linehan, 1994; Linehan, Goodstein, Nielsen, &Chiles, 1983). This trend has been observed with family responsi-bility, such that the importance of family and children has beennegatively related to suicidal ideation (Linehan et al., 1983).Canetto and Lester (2002) identified reasons for suicide by explor-ing suicide notes left behind by men and women. They concludedthat obstacles in love relationships were leading issues for bothgenders. Maris (1981) used path analysis to identify salient failuresrelated to suicide and discovered differences and similaritiesbetween men and women. Both genders cited sex-relatedproblems. In addition, men identified failures that were work-and achievement-related, whereas women identified marriageand family-related failures.

A recent study conducted by Vincent, Boddana, andMacLeod (2004) examined two aspects of positive future-thinkingin suicidal and non-suicidal populations: the ability to think ofgoals and the presence of cognitions related to achieving thosegoals, including plans, perceived control, and perceived likelihoodof success. Although suicidal patients were able to think of positivelife goals, the results clearly identified an obstruction in their abilityto generate methods to achieve those goals. Schotte and Clum(1987) found that suicidal psychiatric patients were less capableof interpersonal problem solving than psychiatric controls. Regard-less of whether it is the poor ability to think of life goals or theabsence of cognitions related to achieving those goals, the blockageof life goals has been noted in individuals exhibiting suicidal beha-vior. These findings lend support to Snyder’s proposition thatblocked life goals may lead to suicidal action.

THE FINAL GOAL OF SUICIDE

The obstruction of important life goals elicits frustration (Snyder,1994, 2000a, 2002). Snyder (1994) clarified that this ‘‘sense of beingblocked and frustrated—a sense of hopelessness—is the catalystthat unleashes the goal of dying’’ (p. 150). Eventually, the pain isunbearable, and there are no more important and apparentlyachievable life goals. Stopping the pain through suicide becomesthe only remaining apparently achievable goal (Snyder, 1994,2002). Snyder (1994, 2000a, 2002) theorized that the motivation



for suicide is to stop the pain by killing oneself. Many otherresearchers have also asserted that the primary reason for suicideis to escape from unbearable pain (Baumeister, 1990; Boergers,Spirito, & Donaldson, 1998; Kral, 1994; Shneidman, 1993).Although some theorists have posited that suicide attempts are ameans of communicating anger or affirming that one is loved, rela-tively little research supports this assertion (Bancroft et al., 1979).Michel and colleagues (1994) conducted a study with individualswho had made a suicide attempt. These participants were askedto reflect back to immediately before their suicide attempt and toindicate the motives that were relevant to their suicidal behavior.The results revealed that reasons related to the wish to escape froman unbearable situation (e.g., ‘‘The situation was so unbearable thatI could not think of any other alternative’’, ‘‘My thoughts were sounbearable, I could not endure them any longer’’; p. 216) wereindicated most frequently. Extrapunitive or manipulative motiva-tions (e.g., ‘‘making people sorry for the way they treated me’’)have been found to be poor predictors for suicide, whereas internalperturbation reasons (e.g., ‘‘to deal with an unbearable situation’’)were significant motivators for suicide (Johns & Holden, 1997).

Shneidman (1985) hypothesized that, when individualsbecome increasingly upset, they move into dichotomous thinkingin which they view suicide as the only solution. The ability to thinkof alternatives to suicide may decline, possibly because of depletedproblem-solving thoughts noted in suicidal individuals when com-pared with non-suicidal people (Levenson & Neuringer, 1971). Inaddition, Snyder (1994) insinuated that ‘‘suicidal people are frozenin an unbearable here and now and cannot think about anychanges in the future’’ (p. 151). Thus, pain, hopelessness, ordepression may set the mental stage for suicide by fixating the per-son on the goal of death, but the will- and way-related thoughts areessential for completing the sequence.

Pathways Thinking

The next marker of suicide lethality, according to Snyder (1994,2002), is one that signals a far more serious threat. Namely, whenthe person begins to describe the means (pathways) by which he orshe is going to carry out suicide, the intent for suicidal behavior isstrengthened. Suicidal pathway thinking may include a person



purchasing a handgun or accumulating antidepressant medicationsto accomplish suicide (Snyder, 2002). Other suicidologists havealso described suicidal preparation as more lethal than suicidalideation (Holden & Kroner, 2003; Lewinsohn, Rohde, & Seeley,1996). A study conducted by Joiner, Walker, Rudd, and Jobes(1999) revealed that resolved plans and preparation (e.g., avail-ability of means to and opportunity for attempt, specificity of planfor attempt, preparation for attempt) were more highly related topernicious suicide indicators than were suicidal desire and idea-tion. There is also evidence that, among suicide ideators, indivi-duals who have formulated a plan for suicide or have beenengaging in preparation for a suicide attempt are at greater risk(Kessler, Borges & Walters, 1999; Mann, 2002). Research indicatesthat access to the means of suicide also heightens the risk of suici-dal action (Neale, 2000). The availability of highly lethal suicidemethods and rates of suicide appear to be related (Mann, 2002).Brent, Perper, Moritz, and Allman (1993) compared adolescentsuicide victims with suicide attempters who survived theirattempts. Guns were twice as likely to be found in the homes ofthe suicide victims as in those of the surviving attempters. If highlylethal means of suicide are inaccessible, it is probable that a lesslethal method may be used thereby increasing the likelihood ofsurvival from the suicide attempt (Mann, 2002). There is evensome evidence that restriction of access to firearms may detersome people from selecting another method altogether (Lester &Leenaars, 1993).

Agency Thinking

Agency thinking is the motivational component and reflects theself-perceptions about one’s capability to achieve the suicide goal.When a person’s life goals are blocked, the goal of suicide mayemerge out of depression and frustration. However, in additionto the pathway, one needs to be motivated to accomplish the goal.Snyder (1994, 2002) suggested that a person’s mood lifts from leth-argy or depression roughly ten days before a suicide act, and dur-ing this phase, the person has the energy to make a suicide attemptor commit suicide. This boost of energy is by far the most seriousindicator of suicide according to Snyder (1994, 2002). It is thisagency that, in the presence of the goal to kill oneself and with



the means to do it, leads to suicidal acts. Snyder’s definition ofagency and its role in suicide-related behavior is a relatively newand important addition to the suicide literature. There has onlybeen limited support for this assertion. Anecdotal reports haveindicated a window of heightened suicide risk when peoplebecome more energetic in the context of continued depressivesymptoms (e.g., problems with low energy subside, but othersymptoms persist; Meehl, 1973). According to this view, indivi-duals may acquire energy to act on their ongoing suicidalityand=or gain cognitive clarity to act on their suicidal intent (Joiner,Pettit, & Rudd, 2004). A few others have also noted that the liftingof depression may raise the energy so that the person may act oncontinued suicidality (Isacsson & Rich, 1997). Shneidman (1985)too theorized that a situation of high probability for suicide is cre-ated when psychache is accompanied with motivation towardegression (e.g., departure from distress). Although agency in suici-dal people is inherently difficult to study empirically, such researchis certainly needed. If indeed agency increases shortly prior to asuicide attempt in the manner described by Snyder, this may bea key opportunity for intervention and prevention of suicide.

Several authors have underlined the importance of a develop-mental approach to suicide, as opposed to a static traditional medi-cal illness model (Michel & Valach, 1997). Unfortunately there aretoo few developmental models to explain suicide, but Snyder’shope theory may begin to fill this gap. Hope theory may alsoexplain the mechanisms behind suicidal risk factors. Accordingto hope theory, people with a history of childhood adversity tendnot to acquire the agency and pathways thinking necessary todevelop hope (Snyder, 1994). As adults, their ‘‘trait hope’’ remainslow. When such people face blockages in adulthood, they mayexperience intense stress. Without well-developed skills in agencyand pathways thinking, they may suffer psychache and no longerbe able to see any attainable and meaningful goals other than toend their pain. At this point, they may adopt the goal of suicideas a solution, and consider no alternative goals. In order to realizethis goal, these people may generate a plan for suicide, such asacquiring a gun. Finally, as Snyder suggests, a burst of energymay allow them to utilize the pathway to achieve the suicide goal.

Hope theory appears to represent a useful frameworkfor understanding suicidal action. Unfortunately, it remains



incomplete as an explanation for suicide. It does not clarify how anindividual who is low on the personality trait of hope managesto develop sufficient (state) hope to pursue the goal of suicide.A second problem is that this novel approach for understandingsuicide has not been subjected to sufficient investigation. Otherthan Snyder and his colleagues, few investigators have tested theassertions of hope theory. Further theoretical development andempirical scrutiny is clearly needed in this area.

Differences in Beck’s Hopelessness Theory andSnyder’s Hope Theory

It is important to note that, although Beck’s hopelessness constructand Snyder’s hope construct appear to be at extreme ends of onedimension, they are outcomes of independent research programsand describe their respective constructs using entirely uniquerationalizations (Henry, 2004). Snyder’s concept of hope is not sim-ply the inverse of Beck’s hopelessness construct, and the two maydiffer qualitatively. Primarily, these two constructs have distinctfoundations; hopelessness theory was developed to account fordepression (Beck et al., 1975) and hope theory originated fromthe positive psychology movement (Lopez et al., 2003; Snyder,1994). Accordingly, hopelessness theory tends to focus on thenegative ‘‘immobilizing side of human behavior’’ (Henry, 2004,p. 352) whereas Snyder’s hope theory has a positive viewpointmaintaining that change is possible (Henry, 2004).

Hope theory may be more accurate at predicting suicide-related behavior and suicidal ideation than hopelessness theory.The view of the future is thought to play a central role in suicidalbehavior, predicting suicide attempts (Petrie, Chamberlain, &Clarke, 1988), and completed suicides (Beck et al., 1989). Beck’shopelessness model describes hopelessness as having more nega-tive thoughts about the future, whereas Snyder’s hope theoryequates low hope with having a lack of positive anticipation forthe future. According to MacLeod and colleagues (1993),decreased positive expectancies and increased negative expectan-cies are not functionally equivalent. In a study conducted by theseauthors, patterns of future thinking shown by individuals high inhopelessness were examined. Participants, patients who had madea recent suicide attempt and matched hospital patient controls,



were asked to generate thoughts of what they were looking forwardto and not looking forward to for a variety of future time periods(MacLeod et al., 1993). Individuals who had recently engaged ina suicide attempt were distinguished from controls by having fewerpositive thoughts about the future, as implied by hope theory.These individuals did not indicate a greater anticipation ofnegative future thinking, as suggested by Beck’s hopelessnessmodel (MacLeod et al., 1993; MacLeod, Pankhania, Lee, &Mitchell, 1997; O’Connor, O’Connor, O’Connor, Smallwood, &Miles, 2004).

Hope theory has presented a more comprehensive concept ofhope and has introduced original instruments to measure it. Hopetheory explains the development of hope whereas Beck’s hopeless-ness theory does not address developmental issues. The develop-mental approach is especially useful for understanding riskfactors (e.g., the link between child sexual abuse and adult suicidalbehavior; Santa Mina & Gallop, 1998), and thus theorizing at amacrolevel. Hope theory also satisfies criticisms faced by Beck’shopelessness theory. Snyder defined the construct of hope andhope components very thoroughly. According to Snyder (1994,2000a), hope and hopelessness are thought to be opposite polesof one dimension. Hope theory asserts that hope develops into atrait, but also recognizes that hope can be influenced in a givenmoment thus resembling a state (Snyder, 1994, 2000a). Separateinstruments were developed to measure each. These measureshave been shown to be resistant to bias, and allow hope to be mea-sured without the prior assumption that a relationship existsbetween depression and suicide, unlike the BHS. A high corre-lation (�.74) between the HS and the BHS reveals that both tapsimilar constructs (Steed, 2001), and thus, the HS may be the betterinstrument of choice because of its brevity (Range & Penton, 1994),factor structure stability (Babyak, Snyder, & Yoshinobu, 1993), andincreased applicability to normal populations because it was‘‘developed with healthy characteristics and behaviors in mind’’(Steed, 2001, p. 314).

Beck’s hopelessness theory appears to emphasize agency-likethought (Snyder, 1994, 2000a), whereas hope theory places equalemphasis on agency and pathways thinking (Snyder, Cheavens,& Michael, 1999). Thus, the theory of hope adds to the existingconcept of hopelessness and provides a unique framework through



which suicide-related behavior can be examined. Researchershave explored hopelessness theory and suicidal action, butthe value of hope theory in understanding suicide needs moreattention.

Future Research

Although hope theory is a promising perspective through which tounderstand suicidal behavior, there is almost no empirical researchin this area. The development of hope needs investigation, prefer-ably through longitudinal studies of agency thinking, pathwaysthinking, and the stability of hope as a personality trait. How closelyare agency thinking, pathways thinking, and trait hope in childhoodrelated to those in adulthood? What is the impact of various inter-vening events on the long-term stability of trait hope? Can verypositive life experiences in adolescence or adulthood raise the levelof trait hope? Research on the relevance of hope theory to under-standing suicide is also needed. What is the relationship of suicidalideation to goal setting ability, agency thinking, pathways thinking,and hope as both a state and trait? Can suicide be predicted by Sny-der’s hope theory measures? Can the tenets of hope theory dis-tinguish between suicide attempters and completers? Do peoplewho are high on trait hope ever commit suicide? Clearly, consider-able empirical research is needed to validate hope theory and itsrelation to suicidal behavior.

Clinical Implications

Hope theory may point toward intriguing new approaches for theprevention of suicide and the treatment of suicidal people. Primaryprevention at the pre-school and elementary school level couldinvolve instilling hope through the active teaching of graduatedgoal setting, agency thinking, and pathways thinking. Teacherscould also be encouraged to watch for children whose goal setting,agency, and=or pathway thinking is poor, and to focus attention ondeveloping such skills in these children. Those providing servicesfor (potentially) suicidal people could incorporate an appreciationof agency and pathway thinking into their assessment andtreatment methods. Snyder’s instruments appear to be brief,



convenient, and reliable measures for the clinical assessment of sui-cide risk. The use of the Hope Scale and the State Hope Scale withsuicidal individuals would enable treatment providers to determinethe degree to which their clients’ current level of hope is belowtheir general (trait) hope level, and to ascertain whether their dif-ficulty is more in goal setting, agency thinking, or pathway think-ing. With this information, treatment could be focused withgreater precision on each person’s individual needs.

Several effective techniques for promoting hope among dis-tressed individuals have been proposed. Snyder (1995) suggestedencouraging these individuals to recall past successes, to reconcep-tualize goals, and to engage in energy-promoting activities such asexercise. To promote hope pathways, Snyder (1994, 2000a) sug-gested promoting smaller or more attainable goals. Additionally,it is important for the distressed individual to contemplate severalroutes for reaching the goal, to develop a supportive social net-work, and to ask others for help (Snyder, 1994, 2000a). Accordingto each suicidal person’s needs, it would be important toimplement goal-focused interventions for individuals consideringsuicide, to help these individuals recognize more life goals andways to achieve these goals (pathways thinking), and=or to increasetheir perception of goal attainability (agency) (Vincent et al., 2004).When individuals learn to be more hopeful, they will be morelikely to make commitments, set goals, and work effectively towardattaining those goals (Shorey, Snyder, Yang, & Lewin, 2003).Snyder (1994) suggested that a purpose for living, demonstratedby having future plans, may protect suicidal persons from suicide.When suicide appears to the individual to be the only possible sol-ution, helping him or her to identify alternative (life enhancing)solutions may be needed. Because suicidal action is preceded bygoal setting, pathways thinking, and agency, there are possibilitiesfor intervention in each of these areas (Snyder, 1994).

Most research has focused on describing social and demo-graphic factors associated with suicidality (Maris, Berman,Maltsberger, & Yufit, 1992), and thus, little is known about thepsychological processes involved in suicidal behavior. Hopetheory may serve as a framework for understanding the psycho-logical processes and developmental influences involved in suici-dal acts. Suicide is a serious public health problem and the studyof suicidology needs to focus on comprehensive theoretical



models, such as hope theory, to organize the empirical knowledgebase of the field and to guide future investigations and interven-tions in the area.

References

Aish, A. & Wasserman, D. (2001). Does Beck’s Hopelessness Scale really measureseveral components? Psychological Medicine, 31, 367–372.

Babyak, M. A., Snyder, C. R., & Yoshinobu, L. (1993). Psychometric properties ofthe Hope Scale: A confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Research in Person-ality, 27, 154–169.

Bancroft, J., Hawton, K., Simkin, S., Kingston, B., Cumming, C., & Whitwell, D.(1979). The reasons people give for taking overdoses: A further inquiry.British Journal of Medical Psychology, 52, 353–365.

Baumeister, R. F. (1990). Suicide as escape from self. Psychological Review, 97,90–113.

Beck, A. T. (1963). Thinking and depression: I. Idiosyncratic content and cogni-tive distortions. Archives of General Psychiatry, 9, 324–333.

Beck, A. T. (1974). The development of depression. A cognitive model. InR. Friedman & M. Katz (Eds.), Psychology of depression: Contemporary theoryand research (pp. 3–27). Washington, DC: Winston.

Beck, A. T. (1986). Hopelessness as a predictor of eventual suicide. Annals of theNew York Academy of Sciences, 487, 90–96.

Beck, A. T., Brown, G., Berchick, R. J., Stewart, B. L., & Steer, R. A. (1990).Relationship between hopelessness and ultimate suicide: A replication withpsychiatric outpatients. American Journal of Psychiatry, 147, 190–195.

Beck, A. T., Brown, G., & Steer, R. A. (1989). Prediction of eventual suicidein psychiatric inpatients by clinical ratings of hopelessness. Journal ofConsulting & Clinical Psychology, 57, 309–310.

Beck, A. T., Kovacs, M., & Weissman, A. (1975). Hopelessness and suicidalbehavior. An overview. Journal of the American Medical Association, 234,1146–1149.

Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., Kovacs, M., & Garrison, B. (1985). Hopelessness andeventual suicide: A 10-year prospective study of patients hospitalized withsuicidal ideation. American Journal of Psychiatry, 142, 559–563.

Beck, A. T., Ward, C. H., Mendelson, M., Mock, J., & Erbaugh, J. (1961). Aninventory for measuring depression. Archives of General Psychiatry, 4, 561–571.

Beck, A. T., Weissman, A., Lester, D., & Trexler, L. (1974). The measurement ofpessimism: The Hopelessness Scale. Journal of Consulting and ClinicalPsychology, 42, 861–865.

Boergers, J., Spirito, A., & Donaldson, D. (1998). Reasons for adolescent suicideattempts: Associations with psychological functioning. Journal of the AmericanAcademy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 37, 1287–1293.

Brent, D. A., Perper, J. A., Mortiz, G., & Allman, C. (1993). Psychiatric sequelaeto the loss of an adolescent peer to suicide. Journal of the American Academy ofChild & Adolescent Psychiatry, 32, 509–517.



Brown, S. L. & Vinokur, A. D. (2003). The interplay among risk factors for suic-idal ideation and suicide: The role of depression, poor health, and lovedone’s messages of support and criticisms. American Journal of Community Psy-chology, 32, 131–141.

Canetto, S. S. & Lester, D. (2002). Love and achievement motives in women’s andmen’s suicide notes. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary & Applied, 136,573–576.

Chang, E. C. (2003). A critical appraisal and extension of hope theory in middle-aged men and women: Is it important to distinguish agency and pathwayscomponents? Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 22, 121–143.

Cole, D. A. (1988). Hopelessness, social desirability, depression, and parasuicidein two college student samples. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 56,131–136.

Cornette, M. M., Abramson, L. Y., & Bardone, A. M. (2000). Toward an inte-grated theory of suicidal behaviors: Merging the hopelessness, self-discrepancy, and escape theories. In T. E. Joiner & M. D. Rudd (Eds.), Suicidescience: Expanding the boundaries (pp. 43–66). New York: Kluwer Academic=Plenum Publishers.

Davis, A. T. (1995). Attempted suicide and depression: Initial assessment andshort term follow-up. In B. Mishara (Ed.), The impact of suicide (pp. 130–141). New York: Springs Publish.

Durham, T. W. (1982). Norms, reliability and item analysis of the hopelessnessscale in general psychiatric, forensic psychiatric, and college populations.Journal of Clinical Psychology, 38, 597–600.

Durkheim, E. (1951). Suicide. New York: Free Press.Fiske, A., Gatz, M., & Hannell, E. (2005). Rural suicide rates and availability of

health care providers. Journal of Community Psychology, 33, 537–543.French, T. M. (1952). The integration of behavior: Vol. 1. Basic postulates. Chicago:

University of Chicago Press.Glanz, L. M., Haas, G. L., & Sweeney, J. A. (1995). Assessment of hopelessness in

suicidal patients. Clinical Psychology Review, 15, 49–64.Gottschalk, L. (1974). A hope scale applicable to verbal samples. Archives of

General Psychiatry, 30, 779–785.Gottschalk, L. A. (1985). Hope and other deterrents to illness. American Journal of

Psychotherapy, 39, 515–524.Hanna, F. J. (1991). Suicide and hope: The common ground. Journal of Mental

Health Counseling, 13, 459–472.Health Canada. (2002). Chapter 7: Suicidal Behavior. In A report on mental illness

in Canada. Ottawa, Canada: Author. Retrieved October 15, 2005 fromhttp://www.cmha.ca/data/1/rec_docs/171_full_report_mic.pdf

Health Canada. (1994). Suicide in Canada: Update of the report of the task force on sui-cide in Canada. Ottawa, Canada: Minister of National Health and Welfare.

Henry, P. (2004). Hope, hopelessness, and coping: A framework for class-distinctivecognitive capital. Psychology & Marketing, 21, 375–403.

Hinton-Nelson, M. D., Roberts, M. C., & Snyder, C. R. (1996). Early adolescentsexposed to violence: Hope and vulnerability to victimization. AmericanJournal of Orthopsychiatry, 66, 345–353.



Holden, R. R. & Kroner, D. G. (2003). Differentiating suicidal motivations andmanifestations in a forensic sample. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science,35, 35–44.

Holden, R. R., Mendonca, J. D., & Mazmanian, D. (1985). Relation of responseset to observed suicide intent. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 17,359–368.

Hollorer, S. & Snyder, C. R. (1990). Discriminant and convergent validation ofthe hope scale. Unpublished manuscript, University of Kansas, Lawrence.

Hughes, S. L. & Neimeyer, R. A. (1993). Cognitive predictors of suicide riskamong hospitalized psychiatric patients: A prospective study. Death Studies,17, 103–124.

Isacsson, G. & Rich, C. L. (1997). Depression, antidepressants and suicide:Pharmacoepidemiological evidence for suicide prevention. In R. W. Maris,M. M. Silverman, & S. S. Canetto (Eds.), Review of suicidology (pp. 168–201). New York: Guilford Press.

Ivanoff, A., Jang, S. J., Smyth, N. J., & Linehan, M. M. (1994). Fewer reasons forstaying alive when you are thinking of killing yourself: The brief reasons forliving inventory. Journal of Psychopathology & Behavioral Assessment, 16, 1–13.

Johns, D. & Holden, R. R. (1997). Differentiating suicidal motivations andmanifestations in a nonclinical population. Canadian Journal of BehavioralScience, 29, 266–274.

Joiner, T. E. (2000). A test of the hopelessness theory of depression in youth psy-chiatric inpatients. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 29, 167–176.

Joiner, T. E., Pettit, J. W., & Rudd, M. D. (2004) Is there a window of heightenedsuicide risk if patients gain energy in the context of continued depressivesymptoms? Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 35, 84–89.

Joiner, T. E., Walker, R. L., Rudd, M. D., & Jobes, D. A. (1999). Scientizing androutinizing the assessment of suicidality in outpatient practice. ProfessionalPsychology: Research and Practice, 30, 447–453.

Kessler, R. C., Borges, G., & Walters, M. S. (1999). Prevalence of and risk factorsfor lifetime suicide attempts in the national comorbidity survey. Archives ofGeneral Psychiatry, 56, 617–626.

Kidd, S. A. (2003). The need for improved operational definition of suicideattempts: Illustrations from the case of street youth. Death Studies, 27,449–455.

Kral, M. J. (1994). Suicide as a social logic. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior,24, 245–255.

Lester, D. & Leenaars, A. (1993). Suicide rates in Canada before and after tighten-ing firearm control laws. Psychological Reports, 72, 787–790.

Levenson, M. & Neuringer, C. (1971). Problem solving behavior in suicidal ado-lescents. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 37, 433–436.

Lewinsohn, P. M., Rohde, P., & Seeley, J. R. (1996). Adolescent suicidal ideationand attempts. Prevalence, risk factors, and clinical implications. ClinicalPsychology: Science & Practice, 3, 25–46.

Linehan, M. M., Goodstein, J. L., Nielsen, S. L., & Chiles, J. A. (1983). Reasonsfor staying alive when you are thinking of killing yourself: The Reasonsfor Living Inventory. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51, 276–286.



Linehan, M. M. & Nielsen, S. L. (1981). Assessment of suicide ideation and para-suicide: Hopelessness and social desirability. Journal of Consulting & ClinicalPsychology, 49, 773–775.

Lopez, S. J., Snyder, C. R., & Teramoto-Pedrotti, J. (2003). Hope: Many defini-tions, many measures. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), Positive psychologi-cal assessment: A handbook of models and measures (pp. 91–107). Washington,DC: American Psychological Association.

MacLeod, A. K., Pankhania, B., Lee, M., & Mitchell, D. (1997). Parasuicide,depression and the anticipation of positive and negative future experiences.Psychological Medicine, 27, 973–977.

MacLeod, A., K., Rose, G. S., & Williams, J. M. (1993). Components of hopeless-ness about the future in parasuicide. Cognitive Therapy & Research, 17,441–455.

Magaletta, P. R. & Oliver, J. M. (1999). The hope construct, will, and ways: Theirrelations with self-efficacy, optimism, and general well-being. Journal of Clini-cal Psychology, 55, 539–551.

Mann, J. J. (2002). A current perspective of suicide and attempted suicide. Annalsof Internal Medicine, 136, 302–311.

Mann, J. J., Waternaux, C., Haas, G. L. & Malone, K. M. (1999). Toward a clinicalmodel of suicidal behavior in psychiatric patients. American Journal of Psy-chiatry, 156, 181–189.

Maris, R. W. (1981). Pathways to suicide: A survey of self-destructive behaviors.Baltimore: John Hopkins University.

Maris, R. W., Berman, A. L., Maltsberger, J. T., & Yufit, R. I. (1992). Assessmentand prediction of suicide. New York: Guilford Press.

McDermott, D. & Snyder, C. R. (2000). The big book of hope. Oakland, CA:New Harbinger Publications.

Meehl, P. (1973). Why I do not attend case conferences. In P. E. Meehl (Ed.),Psychodiagnosis: Selected papers (pp. 225–302). Minneapolis: University of Min-nesota Press.

Melges, F. T. & Bowlby, J. (1969). Types of hopelessness in psychopathologicalprocess. Archives of General Psychiatry, 20, 690–699.

Mendonca, J. D., Holden, R. R., Mazmanian, D. S., & Dolan, J. (1983). The influ-ence of response style on the Beck Hopelessness Scale. Canadian Journal ofBehavioral Science, 15, 237–247.

Menninger, K. (1959). The academic lecture on hope. American Journal ofPsychiatry, 116, 481–491.

Michel, K. & Valach, L. (1997). Suicide as goal-directed action. Archives of SuicideResearch, 3, 213–221.

Michel, K., Valach, L., & Waeber, V. (1994). Understanding deliberate self-harm:The patients’ views. Crisis, 15, 172–178.

Neale, J. (2000). Suicidal intent in non-fatal illicit drug overdose. Addiction, 95, 85–93.Neuringer, C. (1976). Current developments in the study of suicidal thinking. In

E. S. Shneidman (Eds.), Suicidology: Contemporary developments (pp. 234–254).New York: Grune & Stratton.



O’Carroll, P. W., Berman, A. L., Maris, R. W., Mosckicki E. K., Tanney, B. L., &Silverman, M. M. (1996). Beyond the tower of babel: A nomenclature for sui-cidology. Suicide & Life-Threatening Behavior, 26, 237–252.

O’Connor, R. C., Connery, H., & Cheyne, W. M. (2000). Hopelessness: The roleof depression, future directed thinking and cognitive vulnerability. Psychology,Health & Medicine, 5, 155–161.

O’Connor, R. C., O’Connor, D. B., O’Connor, S. M., Smallwood, J., & Miles, J.(2004). Hopelessness, stress, and perfectionism: The moderating effects offuture thinking. Cognition and Emotion, 18, 1099–1120.

Petrie, K. & Chamberlain, K. (1983). Hopelessness and social desirability as amoderator variables in predicting suicidal behavior. Journal of Consultingand Clinical Psychology, 51, 485–487.

Petrie, K., Chamberlain, K., & Clarke, D. (1988). Psychological predictors offuture suicidal behavior in hospitalized suicide attempters. British Journal ofClinical Psychology, 27, 247–257.

Range, L. M. & Penton, S. R. (1994). Hope, hopelessness, and suicidality incollege students. Psychological Reports, 75, 456–458.

Rieger, E. (1993). Correlates of adult hope, including high- and low-hope adults’ recol-lection of parents. Psychology honors thesis, Department of Psychology,University of Kansas, Lawrence.

Rogers, J. R. (2001). Theoretical grounding: The ‘‘missing link’’ in suicideresearch. Journal of Counseling and Development, 79, 16–25.

Rogers, J. R. (2003). The anatomy of suicidology: A psychological science per-spective on the status of suicide research. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior,33, 9–20.

Salter, D. & Platt, S. (1990). Suicidal intent, hopelessness and depression in a para-suicide population: The influence of social desirability and elapsed time.British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 151, 361–371.

Santa Mina, E. E. & Gallop, R. M. (1998). Childhood sexual and physical abuseand adult self harm and suicidal behavior: A literature review. CanadianJournal of Psychiatry, 43, 793–800.

Schotte, D. E. & Clum, G. A. (1987). Problem-solving skills in suicidal psychiatricpatients. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55, 49–54.

Shneidman, E. (1985). Definition of suicide. New York: Wiley.Shneidman, E. S. (1993). Some controversies in suicidology: Toward a mentalistic

discipline. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 23, 292–298.Shorey, H. S., Snyder, C. R., Yang, X., & Lewin, M. R. (2003). The role of hope as

a mediator in recollected parenting, adult attachment, and mental health.Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 22, 685–715.

Snyder, C. R. (1994). The psychology of hope: You can get there from here. New York:Free Press.

Snyder, C. R. (1995). Conceptualizing, measuring, and nurturing hope. Journal ofCounseling & Development, 73, 355–360.

Snyder, C. R. (1998). Hope. In H. S. Friedman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mental health(pp. 421–431). San Diego, CA: Academic.

Snyder, C. R. (2000a). Handbook of hope: Theory, measures, and applications. SanDiego: Academic Press.



Snyder, C. R. (2000b). The past and possible futures of hope. Journal of Social &Clinical Psychology, 19, 11–28.

Snyder, C. R. (2002). Hope theory: Rainbows in the mind. Psychological Inquiry,13, 249–275.

Snyder, C. R., Cheavens, J., & Michael, S. T. (1999). Hopeing. In C. R. Snyder(Ed.), Coping: The psychology of what works. New York: Oxford UniversityPress.

Snyder, C. R., Cheavens, J., & Sympson, S. C. (1997). Hope: An individualmotive for social commerce. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice,1, 101–118.

Snyder, C. R., Harris, C., Anderson, J. R., Holleran, S. A., Irving, L. M., Sigmon,S. T., et al. (1991). The will and the ways: Development and validation of anindividual-differences measure of hope. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-chology, 60, 570–585.

Snyder, C. R., Ilardi, S. S., Cheavens, J., Michael, S. T., Yamhure, L., & Sympson,S. (2000). The role of hope in cognitive-behavior therapies. CognitiveTherapy & Research, 24, 747–762.

Snyder, C. R., LaPointe, A., Crowson, J., & Early, S. (1998). Preferences of high-and low-hope people for self-referential input. Cognition and Emotion, 12,807–823.

Snyder, C. R., Sympson, S. C., Ybasco, F. C., Borders, T. F., Babyak, M. A., &Higgins, R. L. (1996). Development and validation of the State Hope Scale.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 321–335.

Steed, L. (2001). Further validity and reliability evidence for Beck hopelessnessscale scores in a nonclinical sample. Educational and Psychological Measurement,61, 303–316.

Stotland, E. (1969). The psychology of hope. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Tanaka, E., Sakamoto, S., Ono, Y., Fujihara, S., & Kitamura, T. (1998). Hopeless-

ness in a community population: Factorial structure and psychosocial corre-lates. Journal of Social Psychology, 138, 581–590.

Thackston-Hawkins, L., Compton, W. C., & Kelly, D. B. (1994). Correlates ofhopelessness on the MMPI-2. Psychological Reports, 75, 1071–1074.

Vincent, P. J., Boddana, P., & MacLeod, A. K. (2004). Positive life goals and plansin parasuicide. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 11, 90–99.

Welch, S. S. (2001). A review of the literature on the epidemiology of parasuicidein the general population. Psychiatric Services, 52, 368–375.

Westefeld, J. S., Range, L. M., Rogers, J. R., Maples, M. R., Bromley, J. L., &Alcorn, J. (2000). Suicide: An overview. The Counseling Psychologist, 28,445–510.

Wetzel, R. D., Margulies, T., Davis, R., & Karam, E. (1980). Hopelessness,depression, and suicidal intent. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 41, 159–160.

Young, M. A., Halper, I. S., Clark, D. C., Scheftner, W., & Fawcett, J. (1992). Anitem-response theory evaluation of the Beck Hopelessness Scale. CognitiveTherapy and Research, 16, 579–587.



hope theory and suicide

Documents