Abstract :
The present study replicates and extends Lynd-Stevenson (British Journal of Clinical Psychology, in press) by investigating an alternative procedure to measure attributional style when evaluating hopelessness theory. The procedures typically used to measure attributional style are time consuming for respondents and limit the opportunity to measure attributional style in community or clinical samples. Schulman, Castellon and Seligman (Behaviour Research and Therapy, 27, 505–512, 1989) explored an alternative procedure to measure attributional style that involves the content analysis of responses (CAR) and only takes a few minutes for respondents to complete. The CAR procedure, however, assumes that judges will rate responses to questions in a manner identical to the respondent. Although the assumption appears valid when university students are used as judges and respondents, there is no evidence that the assumption holds in community or clinical research when judges and respondents most likely come from different backgrounds. The study was designed to evaluate the CAR procedure when university students judge the written responses provided by a community sample of unemployed adults. The results support hopelessness theory and the CAR procedure as a practical and viable means to measure attributional style in community or clinical samples.
