CRITICAL-EVALUATION OF HARDINESS THEORY - GENDER DIFFERENCES, PERCEPTION OF LIFE EVENTS, AND NEUROTICISM

Women are entering the workforce in increasing numbers and, as a resul t, are faced with greater life stress. Personality characteristics suc h as hardiness have been explored to better understand how people with stand the potentially negative impact of life stress. Hardiness resear ch has recently been strongly criticized for a number of conceptual an d methodological limitations. Multiple regression was used in the pres ent study to address three commonly voiced concerns: the presence of p ossible gender differences, the impact of neuroticism on physical illn ess, and the relevance of perceived life stress (i.e. severity) as opp osed to the simple frequency of life stressors and their effect on phy sical illness in a sample of adult employees (91 males and 85 females) . Kobasa's original hardiness research paradigm (i.e. models based on frequency scores for men) was not supported in this study. The model b ased on the perceived severity of life events and self-reported in hea lth identified a hardiness buffering effect for men after controlling for the effects of neuroticism. For women, however, only neuroticism w as predictive of both the frequency and severity of illness. Treatment interventions and the conceptualization of personality characteristic s associated with positive adjustment are discussed.