TPC Journal V7, Issue 4 - FULL ISSUE

332 The Professional Counselor | Volume 7, Issue 4 the person is able to put the event into perspective and gain a level of growth from the experience. In the words of the proponents, “PTG involves internal changes that can set the stage for changed behavior. There is variation in the degree to which personal changes can be noticed by others in terms of actions taken” (Tedeschi, Calhoun, & Cann, 2007, p. 399). As a construct, PTG is seen as a legacy of trauma, containing “at least three broad categories of perceived benefits” identified by individuals and sometimes by the people in their lives (Tedeschi & Calhoun, 1996, p. 456). The three categories include changes in (a) self-perception, (b) interpersonal relationships, and (c) philosophy of life. PTG occurs when a person endures a traumatic event of seismic proportions that destroys some pivotal part of the person’s worldview (Tedeschi & Calhoun, 2004). Theoretically, PTG has been conceptualized as both an outcome and a process (Zoellner & Maercker, 2006). PTG as an outcome represents substantial positive changes in cognitive and emotional life that could be the opposite of PTSD. The constructs are not two ends of the same continuum; PTG does not imply either an increase in well-being or decrease in distress. Although PTG and PTSD are distinct and independent constructs, prior studies suggest that both phenomena can coexist in traumatized individuals (Powell, Rosner, Butollo, Tedeschi, & Calhoun, 2003). These constructs have both been observed to be higher in females than males, even when trauma experiences are greater in males (Ball & Stein, 2012; Friedman et al., 2014). Based on these findings, it is hypothesized that both male and female participants can exhibit cohabiting symptoms of distress and growth, with females exhibiting higher PTSD and PTG scores. For the sake of this study, PTG is defined as the collective expression of growth and benefit that clients claim to gain after the type of cataclysmic event that challenges their existing worldviews (Calhoun & Tedeschi, 2014; Tedeschi & Calhoun, 1996, 2004). Optimism. The concept of optimism is grounded in theory and research (Carver, Scheier, & Segerstrom, 2010) that explores what motivates people and how motivation is expressed behaviorally. Optimism is the belief, hope, and confidence that good things will happen in a person’s life instead of bad things (Carver & Scheier, 2002; Rand & Cheavens, 2012). Carver, Scheier, Miller, and Fulford (2009) stated that optimists are not disillusioned, but rather they acknowledge the existence and importance of adversity and choose to identify both internal and external resources that can help them cope. Relationships between optimism and trauma have been examined in diverse groups of individuals who have encountered adversity. Research has demonstrated that individuals who perceive they are able to cope have a positive outlook on life and expect good things to happen because they can control their environments (Benight & Bandura, 2004). There also is evidence that a person’s disposition to optimism may be attributable to certain environmental factors (Broekhof et al., 2015). In the Broekhof et al. (2015) study, optimism was found to be inversely related with all subtypes of childhood trauma; however, important sociodemographic, clinical, and lifestyle characteristics moderated this inverse relation. Moreover, literature relates optimism to positive mood and good morale (Peterson & Steen, 2012). Positive mood and good morale lead to perseverance and effective problem solving (Fredrickson, 2001), which in turn lead to overcoming negative traumatic symptoms. People who are generally optimistic often explain causes of events that happen to them and use these explanations as a stepping stone toward growth from adversity (Peterson & Steen, 2012). Additionally, optimistic or hopeful people are able to make informed decisions on their health based on provided information (Rand & Cheavens, 2012; Scheier & Carver, 1985). In a study on health and hope, high-hope women could perform better on a cancer facts test than their low-hope counterparts, even when controlling for previous academic performance. Not surprisingly, hope was inversely related to intentional attempts at self-harm because self-harm efforts are incompatible with