JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR BUSINESS, 87: 253259, 2012

Copyright C Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

ISSN: 0883-2323 print / 1940-3356 online
DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2011.609844
The Impact of Business School Students
Psychological Capital on Academic Performance
Brett Carl Luthans
Missouri Western State University, St. Joseph, Missouri, USA
Kyle William Luthans and Susan M. Jensen
University of Nebraska at Kearney, Kearney, Nebraska, USA
Psychological capital (PsyCap) consisting of the psychological resources of hope, efcacy,
resiliency, and optimism has been empirically demonstrated in the published literature to
be related to manager and employee positive organizational outcomes and to be open to
development. However, to date, little attention has been devoted to the impact of this positive
core construct on important student-related outcomes. This study tests the relationship between
business students PsyCap and their academic performance (grade point average [GPA]). The
results indicate not only the predictive relationship between PsyCap and GPA, but also have
important implications for training of PsyCap for business student development, retention, and
success.
Keywords: academic performance, PsyCap, PsyCap training, psychological capital, student
development
Great organizational leaders such as Andy Grove and Bill
Gates are widely quoted as saying that the most important
assets in their company walk out the door every night. In other
words, they understand that it is their human capital that rep-
resents a distinctive competency that has created value and
separated Intel and Microsoft from their competitors. A core
goal of business schools is to help build this human capital.
They aspire to deliver educated, mature graduates who have
acquired the knowledge, skills, and abilities to ultimately be
successful in the workplace and help their employers distin-
guish themselves from the competition. Traditional methods
at universities to help meet this goal have focused on the
implementation of generic learning skills courses to improve
insufcient performance, or identifying and building up stu-
dents technical and intellectual deciencies. A too often
overlooked approach would be to also focus on and build
on the strengths and positive psychological resources of stu-
dents.
Correspondence should be addressed to Brett Carl Luthans, Missouri
Western State University, Steven L. Craig School of Business, 4525 Downs
Drive, St. Joseph, MO 64507, USA. E-mail: luthans@yahoo.com
The purpose of this study is to explore the role that the
recently recognized psychological resources represented by
what has been identied as psychological capital may have
on business students academic performance. This psycho-
logical capital has emerged from the positive psychology
movement (see Luthans, Youssef, and Avolios [2007] book
that gives the background and theory of psychological cap-
ital) and to date has received considerable attention in the
elds of organizational behavior and human resource man-
agement, but not business education. However, of particular
relevance to business students and ultimately all college grad-
uates entering the job market is that the environment todays
organizations operate in is very challengingdynamic, ul-
tracompetitive, and full of uncertainty.
We propose one way to help engage students and prepare
themto compete and be effective in this kind of newparadigm
environment is through the development of the psychological
capital resources of hope, efcacy, resiliency, and optimism
(sometimes referred to as the HERO within). Together, these
four capacities make up psychological capital, or simply Psy-
Cap (Luthans, Luthans, & Luthans, 2004; Luthans, Youssef,
et al., 2007). Recent research has clearly demonstrated that
PsyCap can be validly measured and is a higher order
core construct that predicts outcomes better than the four
254 B. C. LUTHANS ET AL.
constructs that make it up (Luthans, Avolio, Avey, & Nor-
man, 2007). In addition, a great amount of research indicates
PsyCap is strongly related to desired manager and employee
attitudes, behaviors, and performance (see the recent meta-
analysis by Avey, Reichart, Luthans, & Mhatre, 2011). More
specically, PsyCap has been shown to positively impact
performance at individual and group levels of analyses (e.g.,
Gooty, Gavin, Johnson, Frazier, & Snow, 2009; Luthans,
Avolio, et al., 2007; Walumbwa, Luthans, Avey, &Oke, 2011;
Walumbwa, Peterson, Avolio, & Hartnell, 2010). Moreover,
PsyCap has been demonstrated to provide additive value to
more established measures of employees positive behaviors,
such as organizational citizenship (Walumbwa et al., 2011),
in addition to demographic and more traditional individual
difference constructs such as personality characteristics, core
self-evaluations, and person-organization and person-job t
(Avey, Luthans, & Youssef, 2010).
However, to date there has been no empirical evidence as-
sessing the impact that the PsyCap core construct may have
on student academic performance. Thus, this exploratory
study was conducted to help answer this important research
question.
FOUNDATION FOR POSITIVITY AND PSYCAP
About a decade ago, the positive psychology movement
emerged as a reaction to the preoccupation that psychology
has traditionally had with the pathological, predominantly
negative aspects of human functioning and behavior. Well
known research psychologist and former American Psycho-
logical Association President Martin Seligman and some of
his colleagues believed that too much attention in their eld
was being focused on what was wrong with people and not
enough attention was being directed toward the positive qual-
ities and traits of individuals, or what was right with people.
Thus, the goal of the positive psychology movement is to use
scientic methodology to analyze and promote factors that
focus on health and vitality, make peoples lives better and to
build on the strengths of people rather than being preoccu-
pied with their weaknesses. The focus is on optimal human
functioning, as opposed to pathological human functioning
(Seligman & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000).
Drawing from this positive psychology movement,
Luthans (2002a, 2002b) called for research demonstrating
the effectiveness and applicability of positive psychologi-
cal capacities in the workplace. The term positive organiza-
tional behavior (POB) was coined by Luthans (2002b) and
dened as the study and application of positively oriented
human resource strengths and psychological capacities that
can be measured, developed, and effectively managed for
performance improvement in todays workplace (p. 59). He
identied specic inclusion criteria to distinguish POB and
its constructs from the popular self-help or even traditional
positively oriented organizational behavior constructs. The
following unique, scientic criteria must be met: (a) based
on theory and research; (b) use of reliable and valid measures;
(c) be state-like (as opposed to the more xed trait-like, such
as personality characteristics) and thus open to development;
and (d) have an impact on performance (Luthans, 2002a;
Luthans, Avolio, et al., 2007).
Derived from the positive psychology movement (Selig-
man & Csikszentmihalyi, 2000) and the subsequent POB,
PsyCap was identied as going beyond traditional economic
capital (what you have), human capital (what you know),
and social capital (who you know) and consists of who you
are and what you can become (Luthans et al., 2004). Al-
though there are many construct candidates that can be drawn
from positive psychology to operationalize this PsyCap, the
ones that were determined to best meet the aforementioned
inclusionary criteria include hope, efcacy, resiliency, and
optimism and as a core construct is dened as,
. . . an individuals positive psychological state of develop-
ment characterized by: (1) having condence (self efcacy)
to take on and put in the necessary effort to succeed at chal-
lenging tasks; (2) making a positive attribution (optimism)
about succeeding now and in the future; (3) persevering
toward the goals, and when necessary, redirecting paths
to goals (hope) in order to succeed; and (4) when beset
by problems and adversity, sustaining and bouncing back
and even beyond (resilience) to attain success. (Luthans,
Youssef, et al., 2007, p. 3)
PSYCAP AND STUDENT ACADEMIC
PERFORMANCE
There are previous research studies which have looked at
the relationship between the various psychological con-
structs that make up PsyCap individually (i.e., hope, ef-
cacy, resilience, or optimism) or sometimes two of them on
the impact of student academic performance, as predom-
inantly measured by grade accomplishment. For example,
the psychological construct of efcacy derived from Ban-
duras (1997) social cognitive theory and dened for appli-
cation to performance as ones conviction about his or her
abilities to mobilize the motivation, cognitive resources or
courses of action needed to successfully execute a specic
task within a given context (Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998,
p. 66) was shown to be a strong predictor of rst-year col-
lege student academic performance (Chemers, Hu, & Garcia
2001). Also, in a meta-analysis by Valentine, DuBois, and
Cooper (2004), efcacy was shown to be a strong predictor of
academic success. The psychological construct of optimism,
which is dened as the attributions an individual makes and
the explanatory style an individual uses in response to situ-
ations and events (Seligman, 1998) has been linked to aca-
demic performance as well. For example, studies have shown
that students with more optimistic outlooks signicantly
THE IMPACT OF PSYCAP ON STUDENT PERFORMANCE 255
outperform those with pessimistic outlooks in the classroom
(e.g., Ruthig, Perry, Hall, &Hladkyi, 2004; Solberg, Evans, &
Swgerstrom, 2009; Valentine et al., 2004). Hope, a third psy-
chological resource in the PsyCap core construct, is dened
as a positive motivational state based on an interactively
derived sense of successful (a) agency (willpower) and (b)
pathways (waypower) (Snyder et al., 1991, p. 287). Stud-
ies in educational settings have consistently shown hope to
be predictive of academic performance (e.g., Curry, Snyder,
Cook, Ruby, & Rehm, 1997; Snyder et al., 2002). The nal
psychological variable that makes up PsyCap, resilience, is
dened as a persons ability to bounce back or rebound when
faced with disappointing outcomes, failures, or even positive
changes and events (Luthans, 2002b). Research studies in ed-
ucational settings have shown that students with higher levels
of resilience have stronger academic performance (Martin &
Marsh, 2008).
Because PsyCap has clearly been shown to have a positive
impact on employee performance (Avey et al., 2011; Luthans,
Avolio, et al., 2007) as well as the individual components
with academic performance, our study hypothesis was that
business students PsyCap would be related to their academic
performance as measured by their overall grade point average
(GPA). After presenting the methods and results, we discuss
implications for developing student PsyCap.
METHODS AND RESULTS
Undergraduate students (N =95) enrolledinbusiness courses
at a medium-sized Midwestern university completed a sur-
vey that measured their level of PsyCap in relation to their
academic performance and demographics. Students were in-
formed that the goal of the survey was to better understand
the relationship between an individuals intrinsic capacities
and performance at school. It was emphasized that partici-
pation was voluntary and condential and responses would
only be reported in the aggregate. Students were also in-
formed that the survey information would be analyzed with
GPAs obtained from student transcripts. The widely recog-
nized Psychological Capital Questionnaire (PCQ-24; for the
entire instrument, see Luthans, Youssef, et al., 2007; for the
validity analysis, see Luthans, Avolio, et al., 2007) was orig-
inally developed and tested for employees in the workplace
and adapted for this study to college students. These adapted
items were derived from a panel of experts (including the
original researchers on the PCQ). The instrument consists
of six items adapted from each of the following scales: (a)
hope (Snyder et al., 1996), (b) resilience (Wagnild & Young,
1993), (c) optimism (Scheier & Carver, 1985), and (d) ef-
cacy (Parker, 1998). Sample items from each of the sub-
scales included There are lots of ways around any problem
concerning my schoolwork (hope); I usually manage dif-
culties one way or another concerning my schoolwork
(resilience); I always look on the bright side of things re-
garding my schoolwork (optimism); and I feel condent
setting targets/goals for my schoolwork (efcacy).
For this study, the Cronbachs alpha reliability was an ac-
ceptable .90. In addition to this adapted academic PsyCap
measure, the survey also gathered demographic information
regarding gender, age, year in school (e.g., freshman, sopho-
more), and major area of study (e.g., accounting, nance,
management, marketing). Survey respondents also reported
whether they were part- or full-time students, the average
number of hours devoted each week to schoolwork, and the
average number of hours worked at a job each week.
The study sample was about evenly split between female
(52%) and male students, who were predominantly Cau-
casian (84%), full-time students (93%) between the ages of
19 and 24 years (85%) who worked while attending school
(75%). The study sample also included freshmen through
seniors from a variety of elds of study, with the largest rep-
resentation from management (36%) and accounting (10%)
majors.
As hypothesized, a signicant and positive relationship
(r = .281, p < .01) was found between the students level of
PsyCap and their ofcial GPA (see Table 1). Use of stepwise
regression, with GPA as the dependent variable, showed that
PsyCap emerged as the rst variable to enter the nal model,
explaining nearly 7% of the variance (adjusted R
2
= .069,
p < .01). The second variable, average number of hours per
week devoted to schoolwork, raised the adjusted R
2
to .123,
increasing the explained variance by approximately 5%. The
nal variable to enter the model, a students year in school,
provided an additional 5% in explained variance. All other
variables (including gender, age, major, full- or part-time
status, and weekly hours worked at a job) were excluded
from the nal model (see Table 2). As shown in Table 3, a
1-point increase in school PsyCap related to a 0.008 increase
in GPA.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The purpose of this exploratory study was to examine
the relationship between the school-related PsyCap of
undergraduate business school students and their academic
TABLE 1
Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations of
Study Variables
Variable M SD 1 2 3
Grade point average 3.00 0.52
Academic PsyCap 110.84 15.28 .281

Average hours/week: School work 14.01 10.76 .279

.108
Average hours/week: Working at job 20.58 14.58 .060 .233 .040
Note. PsyCap = psychological capital.

p = .01.
256 B. C. LUTHANS ET AL.
TABLE 2
Stepwise Regression Model Summary (Dependent
Variable: Grade Point Average)
Model R R
2
Adjusted R
2
F df1 df2 p
Predictors: Academic PsyCap .281 .079 .069 7.964 1 93 .006
Predictors: Academic
PsyCap; average
hours/week: School work
.376 .141 .123 6.700 1 93 .011
Predictors: Academic
PsyCap; average
hours/week: School work;
year in school
.448 .201 .175 6.795 1 91 .011
Note. PsyCap = psychological capital.
performance. Results from a stepwise regression analysis
indicated that students self-reported PsyCap signicantly
correlated with the GPA noted on their ofcial transcript.
These ndings conrmed the predicted relationship and pro-
vide support for the idea that business school students could
benet from the integration PsyCap development activities
within their curriculum. In particular, a series of focused mi-
crotraining interventions could be implemented to enhance
the levels of school-related PsyCap among business students
throughout their academic programs. This development pro-
cess would provide business students with additional tools
they need for overcoming barriers to academic success such
as increasing workschool demands and stress. In addition,
the development of PsyCap among business school students
could potentially become a source of competitive advantage
for future career success. The following provides specic
guidelines for business education programs to proactively
develop the positive PsyCap of their students.
Student Development of PsyCap
As indicated, a key feature of PsyCap is that it is state-
like and open to development through instructional programs
(Luthans, Youssef, et al., 2007). Specically, Luthans, Avey,
Avolio, Norman, and Combs (2006) developed a PsyCap In-
tervention (PCI) training model that has been successfully
implemented in a variety of contexts. For example, Luthans,
TABLE 3
Table of Coefcients (Dependent Variable: Grade
Point Average)
Unstandardized coefcients
Model B SE t p
Constant 1.874 0.358 5.230 .000
Academic PsyCap 0.008 0.003 2.528 .013
Average hours/week:
School work
0.012 0.005 2.652 .009
Year in school 0.348 0.133 2.607 .011
Avey, and Patera (2008) were able to demonstrate a signi-
cant and positive increase in the PsyCap of working adults,
representing a cross-section of industries, who received a
2-hr online training intervention. Using a pretestposttest
control group experimental design, the randomly assigned
treatment group (n =187) that received the PCI experienced
a signicant increase in PsyCap. However, the randomly as-
signed control group (n = 177), which received a different
but relevant intervention in the area of group dynamics and
decision making, did not show a signicant change in Psy-
Cap levels. In other words, this study demonstrated that the
PsyCap training caused the participants PsyCap to increase,
and importantly, could be delivered online.
More recently, Luthans, Avey, Avolio, and Peterson
(2010) demonstrated the ability to develop PsyCap in a study
of undergraduate business students and in a second study
of practicing business managers. Using a controlled experi-
mental design in the rst study, the researchers were able to
demonstrate a signicant difference between the PsyCap lev-
els of undergraduate business school students who received
the PCI training (n = 153) and the randomly assigned stu-
dents in the control group (n = 89) who did not receive the
PCI and did not show an increase in their PsyCap. In the
second study, a heterogeneous group of managers (n = 80)
sampled across a wide variety of organizations received the
PCI. Results indicated that those managers who underwent
the training had signicantly higher levels of PsyCap (Time
1 M = 4.79, Time 2 M = 4.93); t = 2.99, p < .01, following
the training intervention. In addition, both self-rated perfor-
mance (Time 1 M = 7.43, Time 2 M = 8.41), t = 9.14, p <
.01, and manager-rated performance (Time 1 M=7.66, Time
2 M = 8.20), t = 2.34, p < .05, signicantly increased pre-
and posttraining intervention. In sum, this previous research
indicates that the PsyCap training not only increased the par-
ticipants level of PsyCap, but also caused their performance
to improve as well.
These studies clearly demonstrate that PsyCap can be de-
veloped with short training interventions. The PCI model
utilized in these studies focused on developing the four psy-
chological resources of hope, optimism, efcacycondence,
and resiliency. Previous research demonstrated discriminant
validity among the four constructs and when combined to-
gether, they produced a synergistic effect in relation to per-
formance that is better than each of the individual resources
by themselves (Luthans, Avolio, et al., 2007). Each of these
four, when combined into PsyCap, can be readily adapted for
development of students PsyCap.
Drawing on the theoretical and clinical guidelines out-
lined by Snyder (2000), hope is developed in the PCI through
goal design, pathway generation, and strategies for overcom-
ing obstacles. For example, to enhance their levels of hope,
students would be asked to identify personally valuable aca-
demic goals that are measurable (e.g., receive a 3.5 GPA
next semester). Next, they would be asked to generate mul-
tiple pathways to reach the goal and to identify the various
THE IMPACT OF PSYCAP ON STUDENT PERFORMANCE 257
resources required to pursue each pathway. After examining
the various routes to reach each goal, the unrealistic ones
would be discarded and a smaller number of realistic path-
ways identied.
Also targeted for student development in the PCI would be
the three major recognized aspects of resiliency attributed to
the work of Masten (2001). These include asset factors, risk
factors, and inuence processes. The most effective develop-
ment strategies tend to be based on enhancing assets (e.g.,
networking through student and professional organizations)
and avoiding risky, potentially adverse events (e.g., working
long, strenuous hours in a part-time job).
Stemming from the work of Seligman (1998), the PCI
model also offers a relevant framework for developing re-
alistic optimism of students. This approach would ask the
student to reect, diagnose, and identify self-defeating be-
liefs when faced by adversity such as the breakup of a long
dating relationship. Next, they would be asked to reect and
evaluate the accuracy of their beliefs about this event. Finally,
if their beliefs are discounted or questioned, they would be
replaced with more realistic, constructive, and accurate be-
liefs.
The last, and arguably best, psychological resource tar-
geted for student development in the PCI model would be ef-
cacy or condence. Bandura (1997) noted that self-efcacy
beliefs are acquired and modied through four routes. These
include mastery experiences, vicarious learning, social per-
suasion, and emotional or physiological arousal. The PCI
described by Luthans et al. (2006) was designed to allow
participants to experience and model success related to their
personal goals. Similar techniques could be utilized to de-
velop efcacy within business students and incorporated into
a larger PsyCap development program. Specic examples of
how these development techniques could be operationalized
for the development of efcacy in business students include
the following.
Mastery experiences. When individuals successfully
accomplish a challenging task, they are generally more con-
dent in their abilities to accomplish the task again. These per-
formance attainments can be a potent source of efcacy be-
liefs because they provide direct credible information about
past success. Given these ndings, one pedagogical rec-
ommendation would be to ensure that instructors teaching
business classes proceeded from simple to complex. Pro-
viding guided mastery experiences would help to build ef-
cacy early in the process. Another implication would be to
set high expectations and challenges for business students.
Bandura (1999) indicated that mastery experiences attained
through perseverant effort and ability to learn build a strong
perception of efcacy. On the other hand, condence built
from successes that came easily will not be characterized
by much perseverance when difculties arise. Still another
recommendation would be to integrate experiential learning
opportunities for students to experience success throughout
the curriculum. Research suggests that learning complex top-
ics is facilitated by incorporating active learning techniques
such as case studies, collaborative projects, or simulation ex-
ercises (Goorha & Mohan, 2009). Using these various types
of teaching methods would provide opportunities for addi-
tional mastery experiences for students to further develop
their self-efcacy related to core business concepts.
Vicarious learning or modeling. Bandura (1999)
noted that if individuals observe relevant others succeed, they
will have increased efcacy in their own ability to succeed.
The impact of such modeling is dependent on how similar
the individual sees him or herself related to the role model
who successfully completed the task. Conversely, observing
the failure of others instills doubts about an individuals own
ability to master similar activities. Applied to the develop-
ment of efcacy within business students, the increased use
of peer tutoring and study groups would be benecial. Cre-
ating this cooperative classroom style would help to develop
efcacy by providing vicarious learning experiences and also
by using role models who would closely resemble those ob-
serving and lead to the conclusion that if they can do it, I
can do it too.
Social persuasion. The importance of providing a pos-
itive learning environment and feedback on progress is well
established. Students beliefs in their condence can be
strengthened by respected, competent others providing pos-
itive feedback and words of encouragement. On the other
hand, negative remarks, condescending attitudes, and reject-
ing nonverbal cues can have a disabling and deating impact
on an individuals condence. This is not to say that posi-
tive feedback should be fake or given at every opportunity.
In fact, positive psychologist Barbara Fredricksons (2009)
research found optimal performance is obtained from a ra-
tio of three positives to one negative comment or interaction.
Thus, guidelines would include giving sincere, objective, and
developmental positive feedback the vast majority of time to
strengthen efcacy and promote a positive learning experi-
ence.
Physical and psychological arousal. A nal source
of efcacy is an individuals physical and emotional state
of well-being. Briey stated, if people feel overly anxious
or physically tired, their efcacy is likely to be diminished.
Although this source of efcacy is probably the least pow-
erful, it still has applications for helping business students
to overcome their fears and hesitancy. For example, students
who feel pressure and anxiety due to test taking need to be
reassured that their physical or psychological symptoms are
task related (e.g., test anxiety) and not the result of some
personal inadequacy (e.g., lack of ability). By the same to-
ken, research has indicated to avoid potential future esteem
issues, when students do well they should be told, you must
have worked hard on this rather than you must be smart
(see Dweck, 2006).
258 B. C. LUTHANS ET AL.
As indicated in the introductory comments, PsyCap is
state-like and can be changed and developed within indi-
viduals (Luthans, Avey, et al., 2010; Luthans, Avolio, et al.,
2007). The PCI offered by Luthans and colleagues provides a
specic framework for enhancing PsyCap levels with specic
applications relevant to business students. Consistent with the
guidelines provided previously, the various dimensions and
overall PsyCap can be enhanced in specic, relatively short
programs or through the widespread integration of develop-
ment strategies across the entire business curriculum.
CONCLUSION
Considerable research has linked the psychological resources
of hope, resiliency, efcacycondence, and optimism to the
academic performance of college students. When combined
together, these resources create a synergistic effect and form
a higher order construct known as positive PsyCap. Results
from this exploratory study were the rst to demonstrate a
signicant relationship between the PsyCap of college busi-
ness students and their academic performance. Based on
these ndings, it is suggested that further research should
be conducted, using controlled experimentation, to isolate
the measurable impact of PsyCap development on positive
academic outcomes. The initial results from this study can
also serve as a catalyst for collegiate schools of business
to investigate ways to incorporate PsyCap development into
their programs through relatively short interventions or by
comprehensive integration across course design, pedagogy,
and curricula. These development programs could be imple-
mented on a widespread basis or specically targeted for
at-risk students (e.g., rst generation college students, stu-
dents from disadvantaged backgrounds, students with low
entrance exam scores, students with learning disabilities). It
is hoped that PsyCap development could help individuals
overcome obstacles to academic achievement (e.g., stress,
burnout, at-risk factors, resistance to change) and serve as a
competitive advantage for business students competing in a
tough market for placement and for success in their future
careers.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank the Missouri Western State University
Foundation and the Logan Fund as well as the University of
Nebraska Foundation and the Kelly Fund for support of this
research.
REFERENCES
Avey, J. B., Luthans, F., & Youssef, C. M. (2010). The additive value of
positive psychological capital in predicting work attitudes and behaviors.
Journal of Management, 36, 430452.
Avey, J. B., Reichart, R., Luthans, F., & Mhatre, K. (2011). Meta-analysis
of the impact of positive psychological capital on employee attitudes,
behaviors and performance. Human Resource Development Quarterly,
22, 127152.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efcacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY:
Freeman.
Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory of personality. In L. Pervin &
O. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality (2nd ed., pp. 154225). New
York, NY: Guilford Press.
Chemers, M., Hu, L., & Garcia, B. (2001). Academic self-efcacy and rst-
year college student performance and adjustment. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 93, 5564.
Curry, L. A., Snyder, C. R., Cook, D. L., Ruby, B. C., & Rehm, M. (1997).
Role of hope in academic and sport achievement. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 73, 12571267.
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York,
NY: Random House.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2009). Positivity. New York, NY: Crown.
Goorha, P., & Mohan, V. (2009). Understanding learning preferences in
the business school curriculum. Journal of Education for Business, 85,
145150.
Gooty, J., Gavin, M., Johnson, P. D., Frazier, M. L., &Snow, D. B. (2009). In
the eyes of the beholder: Transformational leadership, positive psycholog-
ical capital, and performance. Journal of Leadership and Organizational
Studies, 15, 353367.
Luthans, F. (2002a). The need for and meaning of positive organizational
behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 695706.
Luthans, F. (2002b). Positive organizational behavior: Developing and man-
aging psychological strengths. Academy of Management Executive, 16,
5772.
Luthans, F., Avey, J., Avolio, B., Norman, S., & Combs, G. (2006). Psy-
chological capital development: toward a micro-intervention. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 27, 387393.
Luthans, F., Avey, J. B., Avolio, B. J., & Peterson, S. J. (2010). The develop-
ment and resulting performance impact of positive psychological capital.
Human Resource Development Quarterly, 21, 4167.
Luthans, F., Avey, J., & Patera, J. (2008). Experimental analysis
of a web-based training intervention to develop psychological cap-
ital. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7, 209
221.
Luthans, F., Avolio, B. J., Avey, J. B., & Norman, S. M.
(2007). Positive psychological capital: Measurement and relationship
with performance and satisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 60, 541
572.
Luthans, F., Luthans, K., & Luthans, B. C. (2004). Positive psychological
capital: Going beyond human and social capital. Business Horizons, 47,
4550.
Luthans, F., Youssef, C. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2007). Psychological capi-
tal: Developing the human competitive edge. Oxford, England: Oxford
University Press.
Martin, A., & Marsh, H. (2008). Academic buoyancy: Towards an under-
standing of students everyday academic resilience. Journal of School
Psychology, 46, 5383.
Masten, A. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes and development.
American Psychologist, 56, 227239.
Parker, S. (1998). Enhancing role-breadth self efcacy: The roles of job
enrichment and other organizational interventions. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 83, 835852.
Ruthig, J. C., Perry, R. P., Hall, N. C., & Hladkyj, S. (2004). Optimism and
attributional retraining: Longitudinal effects on academic achievement,
test anxiety, and voluntary course withdrawal in college students. Journal
of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 709730.
Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1985). Optimism, coping, and health: As-
sessment and implications of generalized outcome expectancies. Health
Psychology, 4, 219247.
THE IMPACT OF PSYCAP ON STUDENT PERFORMANCE 259
Seligman, M. E. P. (1998). Learned optimism. NewYork, NY: Pocket Books.
Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology.
American Psychologist, 55, 514.
Snyder, C. R. (2000). Handbook of hope. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Snyder, C. R., Harris, C., Anderson, J. R., Holleran, S. A., Irving, L. M.,
Sigmon, S. T., . . . Harney, P. (1991). The will and the ways: Development
and validation of an individual-differences measure of hope. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 570585.
Snyder, C. R., Sympson, S., Ybasco, F., Borders, T., Babyak, M., &Higgins,
R. (1996). Development and validation of the state hope scale. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 321335.
Snyder, C. R., Shorey, H. S., Cheavens, J., Pulvers, K. M., Adams III, V. H.,
& Wiklund, C. (2002). Hope and academic success in college. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 94, 820826.
Solberg, N. L., Evans, D. R., & Swgerstrom, S. C. (2009). Optimism and
college retention: Mediation by motivation, performance, and adjustment.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39, 18871912.
Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998). Self-efcacy and work-related
performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 240
261.
Valentine, J. C., DuBois, D. L., & Cooper, H. (2004). The relation between
self-beliefs and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review. Educa-
tional Psychologist, 39, 111133.
Wagnild, G. M., & Young, H. M. (1993). Development and psychometric
evaluation of the resilience scale. Journal of Nursing Measurement, 1,
165178.
Walumbwa, F. O., Luthans, F., Avey, J. B., & Oke, A. (2011). Authentically
leading groups: The mediating role of positivity and trust. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 32, 424.
Walumbwa, F. O., Peterson, S. J., Avolio, B. J., & Hartnell, C. A. (2010). An
investigation of the relationships among leader and follower psychological
capital, service climate, and job performance. Personnel Psychology, 63,
937963.
Copyright of Journal of Education for Business is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not
be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.