Problem-Solving Appraisal and Psychological Adjustment: January 2012

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/285976054
Problem-Solving Appraisal and Psychological Adjustment
Article · January 2012

DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195187243.013.0032
CITATIONS READS
56 845
2 authors:
Puncky Paul Heppner Dong-Gwi Lee

University of Missouri Yonsei University
182 PUBLICATIONS 8,822 CITATIONS 64 PUBLICATIONS 535 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Self-Esteem Study View project
Attachment View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Puncky Paul Heppner on 30 October 2016.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

The Counseling Psychologist http://tcp.sagepub.com
Problem-Solving Appraisal and Human Adjustment: A Review of 20 Years of Research Using the
Problem Solving Inventory
P. Paul Heppner, Thomas E. Witty and Wayne A. Dixon
The Counseling Psychologist 2004; 32; 344
DOI: 10.1177/0011000003262793
The online version of this article can be found at:

http://tcp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/32/3/344
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
Division of Counseling Psychology of the American Psychological Association
Additional services and information for The Counseling Psychologist can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://tcp.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://tcp.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations (this article cites 61 articles hosted on the

SAGE Journals Online and HighWire Press platforms):
http://tcp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/32/3/344#BIBL
Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

© 2004 Division 17 of Counseling Psychologist Association. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
•
10.1177/0011000003262793
THE
Heppner
COUNSELING
et al.Contribution
Major
ARTICLE / PROBLEM-SOLVING
PSYCHOLOGISTAPPRAISAL
/ May 2004
Problem-Solving Appraisal
and Human Adjustment:
A Review of 20 Years of Research
Using the Problem Solving Inventory
P. Paul Heppner
University of Missouri–Columbia
Thomas E. Witty
North Mississippi Medical Center
Wayne A. Dixon
Southeastern Oklahoma State University
This article reviews and synthesizes more than 120 studies from 20 years (1982-2002) of
research that has examined problem-solving appraisal as measured by the Problem Solv-
ing Inventory (PSI). The goals of the article are fourfold: (a) introduce the construct of
problem-solving appraisal and the PSI within the applied problem-solving literature, (b)
summarize and integrate existing findings using the PSI within and across four major
content areas (psychological adjustment, physical health, coping, and educational and
vocational issues), (c) identify promising research directions that might stimulate future
research and promote theory development, and (d) identify implications for practitioners
in the helping professions. We conclude that problem-solving appraisal as measured by
the PSI is a useful psychological construct with implications for theory and many appli-
cations to build on peoples’ strengths to enhance their life satisfaction and well-being.
OUTLINE
Introduction
Overview of Problem-Solving Appraisal and the PSI
Brief History of Applied Problem Solving, Stress, and Health
Instrument Structure
Illustrations
Reliability Estimates
Construct Validity Estimates
Discriminant Validity and Potential Confounds
Normative Information
THE COUNSELING PSYCHOLOGIST, Vol. 32 No. 3, May 2004 344-428
DOI: 10.1177/0011000003262793
© 2004 by the Society of Counseling Psychology.
344

Heppner et al. / PROBLEM-SOLVING APPRAISAL 345
Theoretical Conceptualizations of Problem-Solving Appraisal

Person-Environmental Models
Generalized Expectancies Within Social Learning Theory
Psychological Adjustment
General Psychological and Social Adjustment
Depression
Hopelessness and Suicidality
Anxiety and Worry
Alcohol Use/Abuse
Eating Disorders
Childhood Adjustment
Childhood Trauma
Instrumentality and Expressiveness
Physical Health
Physical Health Complaints and Health Promotion
Physical Health Complications
Traumatic Brain Injuries
Coping
Hypothetical or Laboratory Problem Solving
Reports of Coping Activities
Help Seeking and Utilizing Helping Resources
Help seeking From University Resources
Utilizing Social Support and Social/Political Resources
Benefiting From Applied Interventions
Educational and Vocational Issues
Intelligence, Academic Ability, Academic Performance, Educational
Level, and Age
Career Planning and Decision Making
Summary and Conclusions
Psychological/Educational/Vocational Adjustment and Physical Health
Coping
Behavioral Observations and Outcomes
Cognitive and Affective Processes
Problem-Solving Effectiveness
Future Research Directions
Evidence of Problem-Solving Effectiveness
Examine and Develop More Complex Models of Human Adjustment
Examine the Utility of Problem-Solving Appraisal in Other Subgroups/
Populations/Cultures
Explore a Broad Array of Associations With Physical Health
Examine the Utility of Enhancing Problem-Solving Appraisal in
Remedial and Preventive Interventions

346 THE COUNSELING PSYCHOLOGIST / May 2004
Identify Determinants of Problem-Solving Appraisal

Further Explicate the Role of Problem-Solving Appraisal With Coping
Implications of Problem-Solving Appraisal for Practitioners
Conceptualization and Diagnosis
Treatment Interventions
Evaluation of Service Delivery
Final Comment
References
Counselors ought to know something about how people solve problems.

—Royce R. Ronning (personal communication, 1973)
Introduction
Through personal communication with the first author beginning in 1973,

Royce Ronning has stressed the importance for counselors to understand
how people grapple with difficult and stressful life problems. What do people
do when they are confronted by problems they have not encountered before?
How can people respond to problems that overwhelm their resources? And
most important, what can counselors do to facilitate clients’ problem-solving
process? These issues are clearly relevant for practitioners in the helping
professions.
Applied problem solving has been the focus of inquiry for many years
(e.g., D’Zurilla & Goldfried, 1971; Shure, 1982; Sternberg, 1982). Applied
problem solving is used in this article to denote a highly complex, often inter-
mittent, goal-directed sequence of cognitive, affective, and behavioral opera-
tions for adapting to what are often stressful internal and external demands
(Heppner & Krauskopf, 1987). People typically face a web of simple and
complex decisions (e.g., getting along with a roommate vs. selecting a life
partner), daily hassles (e.g., saying no to unreasonable requests), and stress-
ful and even traumatic life events including divorce, rape, AIDS, loss of
employment, or the death of a loved one. Not surprisingly, a broad range of
helping professionals, such as counseling psychologists, licensed profes-
sional counselors, social workers, school psychologists, medical staff, and
social service professionals are called on to help people with difficult life
problems. Thus, applied problem solving has a great deal of relevance for
helping professionals, not only to better understand effective and ineffective
problem solving through empirical research but, more important, to apply
those findings to help people work through life transitions and adjustments.

How people respond to difficult life problems is an exceedingly complex

process (e.g., Anderson, 1983; Heppner & Krauskopf, 1987) and seems to
depend on many personal and environmental factors (see Zeidner & Endler,
1996). Some people bring many skills and strengths to how they approach
problems, whereas others have significant problem-solving deficits. The
focus of this article is on a particular person factor—that is, how individuals
appraise their problem-solving capabilities and whether they tend to
approach or avoid the many problems of life. Problem-solving appraisal has
been operationalized by the Problem Solving Inventory (PSI) (Heppner,
1988; Heppner & Petersen, 1982) and used in more than 120 empirical
studies.
The goals of the review are fourfold. First, the article will more fully intro-
duce the construct of problem-solving appraisal and the PSI within the
applied problem-solving literature and provide a theoretical conceptualiza-
tion of problem-solving appraisal. Second, the article will provide a compre-
hensive review and synthesis of 20 years of the PSI literature. Specifically,
the research findings will be summarized and integrated within and across
four major content areas: (a) psychological adjustment, (b) physical health,
(c) coping, and (d) educational and vocational issues. The existing literature
is too large and time-consuming for most readers to study; summarizing the
research will allow readers to more easily understand the patterns of the find-
ings that explicate the role of problem-solving appraisal in human adjust-
ment. The literature review was based on more than 120 empirical studies
and a wide variety of conceptual, theoretical, and empirical articles primarily
from the counseling and clinical psychology literature. In addition to our
knowledge of previous research studies, the primary retrieval strategy was to
use computerized search engines to identify articles that used the PSI. We
also informally contacted active researchers in the area and solicited more
recent research. Although we believe we have identified most of the relevant
literature, our review is primarily based on published articles rather than
unpublished dissertations and convention papers. (Occasionally, we used the
latter to provide information not found elsewhere, such as normative data and
novel or inconsistent findings, or to illustrate issues that merit consideration
in the literature.) The accumulated evidence from the problem-solving
appraisal literature will indicate that perceived effective (as opposed to inef-
fective) problem solvers have better psychological and physical health, better
coping effectiveness, and better vocational adjustment. These studies indi-
cate that problem-solving appraisal (as measured by the PSI) as an individual
difference or person variable seems to be a critical resource or strength for
responding to life’s demands. Moreover, the data indicate that perceived
effective problem solvers appear to be more effective problem solvers in
ways that have been predicted by a wide range of theories.

Third, the review will identify promising research directions that might
stimulate future research and promote theory development within each of the
four major content areas. Although much more is obviously known about
problem-solving appraisal now than 20 years ago, the review also reveals
unanswered questions, topics that have received less attention, and more
complex questions about the theoretical conceptualizations of problem-
solving appraisal. Fourth, the review will identify implications for practitio-
ners in the helping professions. Research has indicated that all three PSI fac-
tors (Problem Solving Confidence, Approach-Avoidance Style, and Per-
sonal Control) play a role in predicting a range of physical and psychological
outcomes. This suggests that a number of counseling and psychoeducational
interventions might profitably focus on the various components of problem-
solving appraisal.
The first section of the article introduces the construct of problem-solving
appraisal as measured by the PSI and places it in the larger context of applied
problem solving. The next four sections summarize the research findings
across the content areas of psychological adjustment, physical adjustment,
coping, and educational and vocational issues. We examined all studies with
regard to gender, race, age, and nationality. The sixth section integrates con-
clusions across the research literature and integrates them into the broader
context of applied problem solving. The last two sections identify future
research directions and discuss implications for practitioners, respectively.
OVERVIEW OF PROBLEM-SOLVING APPRAISAL AND THE PSI
Brief History of Applied Problem Solving, Stress, and Health

Problem solving has been the focus of scholarship ever since Dewey’s
(1933) influential book on problem solving. Problem solving was quickly
perceived as being relevant to education, science, economics, and mental
health. The early focus in the 1950s and 1960s was on basic science and
examined problem solving in various conditions using impersonal laboratory
problems, such as solving water jar or string problems (Wickelgren, 1974).
In the 1960s and 1970s, Shure, Spivack, and their colleagues conducted some
of the earliest and most significant programmatic research in applied prob-
lem solving, which focused directly on psychological adjustment. Conceptu-
alizing problem solving as a constellation of relatively discrete thought pro-
cesses, Spivack and Shure pioneered research on cognitive problem-solving
skills within interpersonal situations, such as problem sensitivity, alternative
solution thinking, casual thinking, and means-end thinking. This line of
research found, for example, that the number of alternatives generated for

solving hypothetical problems was positively correlated with developing

better solutions and was related to better psychological adjustment in general
(Shure, 1982). Other early models of applied problem solving conceptual-
ized it within stage sequential models, most notably D’Zurilla and
Goldfried’s (1971) five-stage model (general orientation, problem definition
and formulation, generation of alternatives, decision making, and verifica-
tion). Conceptualizing applied problem solving in specific and discrete
stages allowed researchers to isolate specific problem-solving activities.
This not only facilitated the investigation of the role of these activities but,
more important, identified specific skills that later became the focus of
psychological interventions for a range of psychological problems (e.g.,
depression; see Heppner & Hillerbrand, 1991).
In the 1970s, there was additional focus on the role of differential levels of
stress associated with different problems; it was later well documented that
both minor and major stress can affect a person’s physical and psychological
well-being (e.g., Fisher, 1986; Houston, 1987; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984;
Selye, 1984). Initially, it was believed that the more stressful the events in
one’s life, the more negative would be the resulting physical and psychologi-
cal outcomes (Holmes & Rahe, 1967). However, research in the 1980s
revealed that not everyone who experienced a great deal of stress had nega-
tive outcomes; rather, there seemed to be individual differences (e.g., the
“hardy personality”; Kobasa, 1979) that somehow buffered the individual
against stress. Thus, an important concept in understanding problem solving
and stress is the interactive relationship between the person and the environ-
ment and especially the balance between a person’s resources and the
environmental demands (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984).
Advances in understanding the complexities of information processing
(e.g., Anderson, 1983) spawned the development of dynamic and nonlinear
models of applied problem solving and further identified the role of individ-
ual differences as key constructs in applied problem solving (Heppner &
Krauskopf, 1987). The 1990s witnessed further refinement of applied
problem-solving models and training (e.g., Nezu, Nezu, Friedman, Faddis, &
Houts, 1998) as well as the incorporation of the notion of problem-solving
effectiveness that resulted in the conceptualization of problem resolution
(e.g., Heppner, Cook, Wright, & Johnson, 1995; Heppner, Cooper,
Mulholland, & Wei, 2001).
As far back as 1965, counseling psychologists such as Krumboltz main-
tained that the central reason for the existence of the applied counseling and
clinical professions was that clients need professional assistance for stressful
problems they have been unable to resolve. Subsequently, counseling or psy-
chotherapy has been conceptualized in the last 40 years as helping clients
resolve difficult and stressful problems (e.g., D. N. Dixon & Glover, 1984;

D’Zurilla & Goldfried, 1971; Fretz, 1981; Krumboltz, 1965; Urban & Ford,
1971; Weitz, 1964). Moreover, problem solving has been applied to the ther-
apy process in terms of (a) an integrative theoretical model (e.g., D. N. Dixon
& Glover, 1984; D’Zurilla, 1986; D’Zurilla & Goldfried, 1971; Nezu, Nezu,
& Perri, 1989), (b) a central construct in assessing counseling outcomes
(Heppner, Cooper, et al., 2001), (c) the assessment of how clients process
information and cope with a multitude of personal problems (e.g., Heppner
& Krauskopf, 1987; Long, Kahn, & Schutz, 1992), and (d) a broad range of
counseling interventions, such as problem-solving training for both remedial
and preventive interventions (e.g., D’Zurilla & Nezu, 1982; Heppner &
Hillerbrand, 1991) or strategies for decision-making interventions (e.g.,
Horan, 1979). In addition, research indicated that effective counseling seems
to result not only in resolving clients’ problems but also in improving clients’
perceived problem-solving abilities (Heppner, Cooper, et al., 2001; M. J.
Heppner et al., in press). Thus, problem solving has been seen as a useful and
central construct for psychologists and other helping professionals not only
to conceptualize the counseling process but also to take counseling out of a
pathological rubric and place it squarely into positive psychology and
building on people’s skills.
In the cognitive revolution of the 1970s and 1980s, investigators were
becoming more interested in how individuals appraise their abilities (e.g.
Antonovsky, 1979; Bandura, 1982). This research was influenced by the
notion of higher order or metacognitive variables (e.g., Brown, 1977; Flavell &
Wellman, 1977; Meichenbaum & Asarnow, 1979). Metacognition refers to
an individual’s awareness of the processes that affect the efficient use of cog-
nitive skills. A few years later, Bandura (1986) published his influential book
on self-efficacy and provided substantial evidence to support the notion that a
situation-specific appraisal (self-efficacy) affects motivation, behavior,
thoughts, and emotional reactions to stressful situations. Most important, in
1981, Butler and Meichenbaum integrated metacognitive variables into the
problem-solving literature. They suggested that problem-solving research
should be concerned not only with “the specific knowledge or processes that
individuals may apply directly to the solution of problems but with higher
order variables that affect how (and whether) they will solve problems” (p.
219). Butler and Meichenbaum went on to hypothesize that an individual’s
appraisal of his or her problem-solving skills will not only affect problem
solving performance but might be an important predictor variable of the
problem-solving process. In short, in the late 1970s and early 1980s, scholars

suggested that the appraisal of one’s problem-solving skills might well be an

important component of how a person approaches life’s challenges.
Consistent with Butler and Meichenbaum’s notion of appraisal of one’s
problem-solving skills, Heppner and Petersen (1982) developed the PSI,
which resulted in the assessment of problem-solving appraisal. Heppner and
Petersen sought to develop a problem-solving inventory to assess five of the
most commonly identified problem-solving stages (general orientation,
problem definition, generating alternatives, decision making, and evalua-
tion). The results of the factor analysis did not support the existence of the
five stages. Instead, the items from each of the stages loaded in almost ran-
dom fashion across three factors (Problem-Solving Confidence, Approach-
Avoidance Style, and Personal Control). “The results [were] interpreted as
suggesting the existence of underlying dimensions across stages within stu-
dents’ perceptions of their real-life personal problem solving. . . . [and identi-
fied] important individual differences in the applied problem-solving pro-
cess” (Heppner & Petersen, 1982, p. 72). Subsequently, the PSI has been
widely used across many disciplines and translated into at least eight
languages.
In addition to problem-solving appraisal, researchers have used a number
of strategies to assess applied problem solving (see Butler & Meichenbaum,
1981; Heppner & Wang, 2003). One strategy has been to assess the nature
and frequency of personal problems; the basic assumption has been that
fewer problems suggest more effective problem solving. One of the earliest
measures was the 330-item Mooney Problem Checklist (Mooney & Gordon,
1950); a more recent version adapted for counseling is a computerized
branching system to assess the presence and severity of common problems
reported in therapy such as mood (McCullough & Farrell, 1983). A second
strategy has been to assess what is assumed to be problem-solving ability by
providing a task that requires cognitive processes related to applied problem
solving. The Means-End Problem Solving Procedure (MEPS) (Platt &
Spivack, 1975) assesses one’s cognitive ability to plan, step-by-step, the
means of moving toward an effective solution of interpersonal problems. A
wide range of research suggests that the MEPS differentiates clinical from
nonclinical populations across elementary children (e.g., Shure & Spivack,
1972), adolescents (e.g., Platt, Spivack, Altman, Altman, & Peizer, 1974),
and adults (e.g., Platt & Spivack, 1972).
A third strategy has been to assess problem-solving attitudes and skills
through self-report assessments, such as the Social Problem Solving Inven-
tory (SPSI) (D’Zurilla & Nezu, 1990). The SPSI has a Problem Orientation
Scale to assess attitudes and a Problem-Solving Skills Scale to assess skills;
results suggest that the SPSI is correlated with measures of psychological

health (D’Zurilla & Nezu, 1990). A fourth strategy has assessed verbal
reports of one’s problem-solving activities that facilitate or inhibit progress
toward resolving problems, such as the Problem Focused Style of Coping
(PF-SOC) (Heppner, Cook, et al., 1995). The PF-SOC assesses perceived
effectiveness of applied problem-solving activities; research suggests that
the PF-SOC adds meaningful variance in predicting psychological distress
even after major problem-solving and coping instruments are removed
(Heppner, Cook, et al., 1995). The multiple assessment strategies reflect the
multifaceted nature of applied problem solving. Only the PSI, however, is
conceptualized as a measure of problem-solving appraisal and has been rec-
ognized as one of the most widely used self-report inventories in applied
problem solving (Nezu et al., 1989).
In the past, researchers have distinguished between verbal self-reports of
problem solving versus observational assessments of problem-solving
behaviors (e.g., Butler & Meichenbaum, 1981; D’Zurilla, 1986). Observa-
tional approaches assess overt problem-solving performance in natural or
simulated problem-solving situations. Observational methods are useful for
assessing overt problem-solving performances or the product of problem-
solving processes. Despite the appeal of observational approaches, this
assessment strategy encounters complex measurement issues; see D’Zurilla
(1986) for a more thorough discussion of the advantages and limitations of
this assessment approach. The self-report method has been the most common
method of assessment and has been more fully developed through empirical
research in the literature. For the purpose of this article, it is important to note
that the PSI is a verbal self-report measure of one’s problem-solving capaci-
ties. Our review concludes that the pattern of research findings suggests that
the PSI seems to be substantially associated with problem-solving perfor-
mance but should not be considered synonymous with problem-solving
effectiveness.
Instrument structure. The PSI assesses perceptions of one’s problem-

solving ability as well as behaviors and attitudes associated with problem-
solving style (Heppner, 1988; Heppner & Baker, 1997). The inventory does
not assess actual problem-solving skills but rather one’s perception of one’s
problem-solving beliefs and style. The PSI consists of 35 items, including 3
filler items, with a 6-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly agree to 6 = strongly
disagree). The instructions define problems as personal problems that many
people experience, such as depression, inability to get along with friends, or
deciding whether to get a divorce.

The initial exploratory factor analysis (Heppner & Petersen, 1982) sug-
gested three factors within the PSI: (a) Problem Solving Confidence (PSC,
11 items), (b) Approach-Avoidance Style (AAS, 16 items), and (c) Personal
Control (PC, 5 items); the PSI total score is the sum of these three subscales.
Each factor provides an appraisal of a specific dimension of one’s problem-
solving style, and the total score reflects an individual’s overall appraisal of
his or her problem-solving style. Scores for all three factors and the total PSI
are continuous rather than categorical scores. In some of the initial studies
using the PSI, high (perceived effective problem solvers) and low (perceived
ineffective problem solvers) were identified by using cutoff scores as one
standard deviation above or below the mean PSI total score (e.g., Heppner,
Hibel, Neal, Weinstein, & Rabinowitz, 1982). For the most part, however,
perceived effective and ineffective problem solvers are operationalized as
those who score toward one end versus the other end of the continuous range
of PSI scores. PSC is defined as an individual’s self-assurance, beliefs, and
trust in his or her ability to effectively cope with a wide range of problems
(e.g.,”When faced with a novel situation, I have confidence that I can handle
problems that may arise”). Lower scores on the PSC reflect higher levels of
problem-solving confidence. AAS refers to a general tendency to approach
or avoid different problem-solving activities (e.g., ”When making a decision,
I weigh the consequences of each alternative and compare them against each
other”). Lower scores are associated with a style of approaching rather than
avoiding problems. PC is defined as believing one is in control of one’s emo-
tions and behaviors while solving problems (e.g., “Even though I work on a
problem, sometimes I feel like I am groping or wandering and am not getting
down to the real issue”). Lower scores on PC indicate a more positive individ-
ual perception of personal control in handling problems. Lower scores on
each factor (and thus on the total PSI score) are generally considered more
functional (important exceptions are discussed later under Problem-Solving
Effectiveness). The intercorrelation among these three factors ranged from
.39 to .69 across a range of studies on PSI (see Heppner, 1988). Results sug-
gest that the factors are not only interrelated but also independent enough to
be considered as separate factors (see Heppner, 1988; Heppner & Wang,
2003). Subsequent studies using either exploratory or confirmatory factor
analyses indicate that the PSI factors tend to replicate well across different
age groups from various backgrounds, such as midwestern White college
students (e.g., Heppner, Baumgardner, Larson, & Petty, 1988), French Cana-
dian adults (LaPorte, Sabourin, & Wright, 1988), Turkish college students
(Sahin, Sahin, & Heppner, 1993), South African college students (Heppner,
Pretorius, Wei, Lee, & Wang, 2002), and midwestern high school students
(using an adolescent version of the PSI with language adjusted to a fourth-
grade reading level; Heppner, Manley, Perez, & Dixon, 1994).

Illustrations. To illustrate the construct of problem-solving appraisal,

consider the following scenarios of two college students in their freshman
year at a small liberal arts university.
One month into the semester, Natasha had the nagging feeling that things
were not working out well with her residence hall roommate. Fredricka
tended to stay out late every night partying and many nights would not come
back to the room at all. She often would consume too much alcohol and
become loud and sometimes verbally abusive to Natasha. Natasha was a seri-
ous student, and although she enjoyed an occasional party, her academic
work came first. For the first few weeks of the semester, Natasha thought her
roommate was just experimenting with freedom, but as midterms arrived,
Natasha realized this was a more serious and habitual problem and decided
that she needed to do something about it. She initially confided in a friend and
then in her residence hall coordinator; after considerable discussion, it was
agreed that the best solution would be for Natasha to move to another room
with a quieter, more studious roommate. In addition, although it was a sensi-
tive issue, Natasha found a time to discuss her decision when Fredricka
seemed calm and rested. Natasha explained that she did not think they made a
very good match and that she had asked to be reassigned to another room-
mate. Fredricka was predictably upset and called Natasha some nasty names.
Although Natasha was briefly upset, she adjusted quickly to the move and to
her new roommate; she was relieved that she took action. Natasha tended to
approach problems and have confidence in her ability to resolve them. She
did not get overly emotional about the problem but rather took the necessary
steps to solve it.
In contrast, during his freshman year, Justin also had difficulties with his
roommate Sean, a devout religious person. At first, Sean’s religious beliefs
seemed to fit nicely with Justin’s strong religious beliefs and values. How-
ever, as the semester progressed, Sean began to push his beliefs onto Justin,
suggesting that to be saved, he needed to join Sean’s church. At first, Sean
just mentioned it in passing, but soon he became more insistent that Justin go
to church with him, attend regular bible study, and pray with him in the room.
Justin started feeling more and more uncomfortable, but he had no idea what
he could do. So he started avoiding Sean and tried to be in their room as little
as possible. He asked to sleep overnight in other people’s rooms, he began to
go home every weekend, and he would pretend he was sleeping when Sean
came in the room. This issue not only disrupted Justin’s studies but caused
him much inconvenience. He also found himself feeling badly about himself
for not being able to handle this problem. He became increasingly frustrated
and angry but was not confident that approaching his roommate would help.
In fact, his confidence started waning, and he wondered if he should be in col-
lege. He was depressed and anxious, and he started having difficulty sleep-

ing. He decided to “sit out” the next semester to “get some perspective,” but
he never returned to college.
These stories highlight the role of one’s appraisal of one’s problem-
solving style in responding to stressful situations and how people with differ-
ent problem-solving styles (e.g., approaching vs. avoiding problems, prob-
lem-solving confidence) respond to similar situations in very different ways.
The examples indicate how self-assessment of one’s problem-solving skills,
such as problem-solving confidence, can affect how one proceeds in grap-
pling with a problem, which often results in very different psychological out-
comes. In fact, research from a number of areas (consistent with the basic ten-
ets of cognitive therapy) has indicated that when people are confronted with
stressful events, it is not the stress per se but rather how one responds to phys-
ical or psychological stress that can either help or hinder its resolution and
determine whether one reaches physical and psychological well-being (see
D’Zurilla & Nezu, 1982; Friedman, 1992; Snyder & Ford, 1987; Zeidner &
Endler, 1996).
Reliability estimates. The PSI has been found to have acceptable internal
consistency estimates across a number of populations and cultures (e.g.,
Heppner, 1988; Heppner et al., 1994, 2002). Summing across studies, the PSI
total obtains average alpha coefficients in the high .80s, whereas two of the
factors (PSC and AAS) obtain average alpha coefficients in the low to mid-
.80s, and the third factor (PC) obtains average alpha coefficients in the low
.70s. These results suggest that the PSI is internally consistent across differ-
ent forms of the PSI used across different cultural groups (Heppner & Wang,
2003).
Several studies provided estimates of stability of PSI scores over various
time intervals, from 2 weeks to 2 years across different samples. Total PSI
scores are correlated .80 over 2 weeks, .81 over 3 weeks as well as 4 months,
and .60 over 2 years across samples of White college students, Black college
students, and French Canadian adults (e.g., Heppner, 1988). The results sug-
gest that the PSI scores are stable over time across different populations and
cultures (Heppner & Wang, 2003).
Construct validity estimates. A range of studies provide a wealth of data

supporting the validity of the PSI (see Heppner, 1988; Heppner & Baker,
1997; Heppner & Lee, 2002). For example, in terms of construct validity, the
three factor scores and the total PSI score were correlated with students’
ratings of their level of program-solving skills and their perceived level of
satisfaction with skills (Heppner & Petersen, 1982) as well as other problem-
solving self-reports (e.g., Rath, Langenbahn, et al., in press). Judges blind to
participants’ PSI scores independently and successfully differentiated high

and low scores on the PSI (Heppner et al., 1982; Larson, 1984). The PSI also
outperforms standard neuropsychological problem-solving measures to dif-
ferentiate adults with traumatic brain injuries from uninjured adults (e.g.,
Rath, Langenbahn, et al., in press; Rath, Simon, Langenbahn, Sherr, & Diller,
2000) and predicts external observers’ judgments of the ability of traumatic
brain-injured patients to function independently in the community (Rath,
Hennessy, & Diller, 2003) and their performance on standard neuropsy-
chological timed attention tasks (Rath, Langenbahn, et al., in press). The PSI
has also been found to prospectively predict objective behavioral health out-
comes, such as decubitus ulcers and urinary tract infections, in theoretically
predicted manners (e.g., Godshall & Elliott, 1997; Herrick, Elliott, & Crow,
1994). The PSI has also predicted a wide range of psychological adjustment
indices in theoretically consistent manners—notably, global measures of
adjustment such as self-esteem, depression, anxiety, and hopelessness but
also those associated with specific types of psychological adjustment prob-
lems such as eating disorders (see Heppner & Baker, 1997, for a partial list-
ing). Moreover, mothers’ PSI scores predict independent observations of
children’s social and emotional development (Walker & Johnson, 1986). The
PSI has been found to relate to a wide range of cognitive responses, including
expectations, attributions, and negative self-statements, and affective
responses such as increased emotional arousal and emotionally focused self-
statements when coping with difficult situations (e.g., Larson, Potenza,
Wennstedt, & Sailors, 1995; Mayo & Tanaka-Matsumi, 1996).
Discriminant validity and potential confounds. In terms of discriminant

validity, Campbell (1960) maintained that it is useful to determine if any new
test is correlated within intelligence. Correlations between the PSI factors
and both verbal and quantitative intelligence measures of the SCAT, Series II
(Educational Testing Service, 1979) were small: PSC (r = .08-.10), AAS (r =
.11-.12), and PC (r = .09-.15), respectively (Heppner & Petersen, 1982).
Similarly, Campbell (1960) maintained that it is useful to correlate each test
with a measure of social desirability. Results revealed small correlations
between the PSI factors and social desirability (as measured by the Marlow-
Crowne Social Desirability Scale (Crowne & Marlowe, 1964): PSC (r = –
.09), AAS (r = –.24), and PC (r = –.16) (Heppner & Petersen, 1982). Bolger
(1990) has also maintained that personality variables such as neuroticism and
negative affectivity influence the coping and problem-solving process and
thus merit examination to determine that two separate constructs are being
measured. The PSI factors have small to moderate correlations (0% to 16%
shared variance) with negative affectivity (NA): PSC (r = .11-.40), AAS (r =
.01-.32), and PC (r = .20-.42) (e.g., Elliott, Herrick, MacNair, & Harkins
1994; Elliott, Sherwin, Harkins, & Marmarosh, 1995; Elliott, Shewchuk,

Richeson, Pickelman, & Franklin, 1996; Heppner, Lee, Wei, Anderson, &
Wang, 2001). A large amount of data suggests that the PSI does not have sim-
ilar relations with NA-related variables as depicted by Clark and Watson
(1991): (a) When examined with other coping variables, NA failed to be a
significant predictor of unique variance of the PSI (Larson, Piersel, Imao, &
Allen, 1990); (b) NA is fundamentally a mood-based dimension with little
relationship to behavioral outcomes (Clark & Watson, 1991) and is more
strongly related to emotion-focused coping (e.g., Scheier & Carver, 1985);
conversely, the PSI is fundamentally a cognitive-based inventory, consis-
tently related to problem-focused coping activities (e.g., Heppner, Reeder, &
Larson, 1983; Larson et al., 1990), has predicted behavioral outcomes in sev-
eral studies (e.g., Elliott, 1992), and has even linked mothers’ PSI scores and
their children’s social and behavioral adjustment (e.g., Reis & Heppner,
1993; Walker & Johnson, 1986); (c) the PSI predicts psychological distress
(Heppner, Lee, et al., 2001) and behavioral outcomes (Elliott, Shewchuk,
Richeson, et al., 1996) even after variance as a result of NA is removed; (d)
contrary to NA-related variables, longitudinal research has found the PSI to
be a significant predictor of depression over time after initial estimates of
depression were removed (W. A. Dixon, Heppner, Burnett, Anderson, &
Wood, 1993); (e) NA-related variables like hardiness or optimism have not
consistently moderated relations between stress and illness (Allred & Smith,
1989; Funk & Houston, 1987), whereas in several studies, the PSI has consis-
tently moderated stress and depression (e.g., Cheng & Lam, 1997; Rich &
Bonner, 1987); and (f) the PSI relates to affective, cognitive, and behavioral
variables such as problem-focused coping and attributional patterns that sug-
gest responsibility in ways that are inconsistent with a mood-based dimen-
sion of NA. In short, the PSI does not seem to be another measure of intelli-
gence, social desirability, or negative affectivity.
Normative information. The means suggest that clinical populations have

considerably higher PSI means than do nonclinical populations. For college
students, measures of central tendency for nonclinical samples tended to
have PSI means around 88 (see Heppner, 1988), whereas for clinical college
student samples, the PSI mean tended to be around 100 (e.g., Nezu, 1986b).
Likewise for adults, measures of central tendency for nonclinical samples
typically had a PSI mean in the low 80s (e.g., Sabourin, Laporte, & Wright,
1990), whereas for clinical adult samples, the PSI mean tended to be around
100 (Reis & Heppner, 1993). Although these average PSI means represent
approximations (i.e., sample sizes were not taken into account), the distribu-
tions seem to suggest impressive differences between clinical and
nonclinical samples. (Interested readers may contact the first author for
details.)

Theoretical Conceptualizations of Problem-Solving Appraisal
Although a complete theoretical analysis of applied problem solving and

coping is beyond the focus of this article, it is useful to briefly situate
problem-solving appraisal within a theoretical context. This section will
begin by placing problem-solving appraisal as a person variable within the
global person-environment conceptualizations of coping. As a person vari-
able and consistent with Butler and Meichenbaum (1981), problem-solving
appraisal will then be placed within the social problem-solving theory of
D’Zurilla and colleagues as a generalized set of beliefs or expectancies about
one’s problem-solving abilities. Research discussed later in the article will
support the conclusion that the problem-solving appraisal literature supports
general theories such as the person-environment model of coping and the
social problem-solving model and more specific theories of psychological
adjustment (e.g., suicide).
Person-environment models. Although there is a wide range of theoretical

conceptualizations of coping and problem solving (e.g., Antonovsky, 1979;
Carver, Scheier, & Pozo, 1992; Dohrenwend & Dohrenwend, 1978;
D’Zurilla, 1986; Heppner & Krauskopf, 1987; Kobasa, 1982; Lazarus &
Folkman, 1984; Wortman, Sheedy, Gluhoski, & Kessler, 1992), one of the
most common elements of these conceptualizations is a person-environment
interaction theoretical perspective. Problem-solving appraisal is conceptual-
ized as a person variable in such a model. Introduced by Dohrenwend and
Dohrenwend (1978), a common theme among many of the coping theories is
the balance between the demands of the situation (or environment) and the
abilities or resources of the person (e.g., D’Zurilla, 1986; Fisher, 1986;
Heppner & Krauskopf, 1987; Lazarus, DeLongis, Folkman, & Gruen, 1985;
Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Thus, stress has been conceptualized in terms of
the imbalance between demands and resources (Fisher, 1986; Schlossberg,
1981); stress occurs when an individual lacks the capacity to meet objec-
tively and subjectively appraised environmental demands. The resources
available to an individual can be wide ranging, such as different types of
social support, financial well-being, prior experience or knowledge of a par-
ticular problem, and actual coping skills. In short, a major theoretical devel-
opment in the coping literature in the past 20 years has been the identification
of coping resources that account for individual variability in response to
stress. The resource variables have been conceptualized as vulnerability or
resistance to stress (Wortman et al., 1992) and explain why some people are
able to cope with traumatic events while others experience a great deal of
stress and adjustment difficulties. The usefulness of the many types of

personal resources may vary depending on the magnitude of the environmen-

tal demands (e.g., isolated demands vs. social systems that promote poverty
or racism). Thus, a critical resource for coping is one’s problem-solving
appraisal or general evaluation of oneself as a problem solver.
Generalized expectancies within social learning theory. Heppner and

Petersen (1982) initially conceptualized the three PSI factors as variables
associated with a motivational or expectancy component or within social
learning theory. Specifically, the first (Problem Solving Confidence) and
third (Personal Control) factors seem to be directly related to expectancy or
control constructs by Rotter (1966) and to self-efficacy (Bandura, 1986). The
first factor, Problem-Solving Confidence, seems to be conceptually consis-
tent with Bandura’s (1986) construct of self-efficacy, whereas the third fac-
tor, Personal Control, assesses expectancies of emotional regulation during
problem solving. The second factor, Approach-Avoidance Style, assesses
whether a person has a general tendency to approach or avoid problems and
seems to be a motivational construct akin to the early conceptualizations of
approach-avoidance by Dollard and Miller (1950) now found in many cop-
ing inventories. “Based on countless personal experiences within the world,
individuals develop general beliefs about themselves and their abilities,
forming general evaluations and expectancies about themselves as well as
about others” as problem solvers (Heppner, 1988, p. 16). Thus, problem-
solving appraisal has been conceptualized as a personal resource variable
(Heppner & Lee, 2002) and, specifically, a general set of beliefs or
expectancies about one’s problem-solving ability (Heppner, 1988).
Other writers have proposed that the appraisal of one’s ability to cope
effectively, as distinct from one’s actual ability, is a central construct in prob-
lem solving and coping (e.g., Antonovsky, 1979; Butler & Meichenbaum,
1981; Coyne & Lazarus, 1980; D’Zurilla, 1986; Heppner & Krauskopf,
1987; Kobasa, 1979; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Tracey, Sherry, & Keitel,
1986). For example, Lazarus and Folkman (1984) noted, “The important
point is that whether general or specific, illusory or realistic, one’s belief in
one’s ability to control an event influences how that event is appraised and
through appraisal, subsequent coping activity” (p. 77). On a broader scale,
Bandura (1986) has identified personal efficacy (defined as “people’s
judgments of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action
required to attain designated types of performance,” [p. 391]) as a central
self-regulation mechanism in human agency. Although both personal effi-
cacy and problem-solving appraisal focus on self-beliefs, the former are situ-
ation-specific judgments of expected performance levels, whereas the latter
is a more global appraisal of one’s problem-solving style in general.

D’Zurilla and colleagues (D’Zurilla, 1986; D’Zurilla & Goldfried, 1971;

D’Zurilla & Nezu, 1990) provide the broadest theoretical description of gen-
eralized expectancies within problem solving from a social learning perspec-
tive. They conceptualized the problem-solving process in terms of a general
motivational component that encompasses generalized cognitive-affective-
behavioral response tendencies. Moreover, their motivational component
specifically includes “relatively stable . . . appraisals, expectancies . . .
personal-control beliefs and . . . approach-avoidance tendencies” (D’Zurilla
& Nezu, 1990, p. 157). Thus, problem-solving appraisal has been further
conceptualized as a set of general beliefs and expectancies specifically
within the social problem-solving theory of D’Zurilla and colleagues (see
D’Zurilla & Nezu, 1999). Nezu and Perri (1989) have suggested that the
Approach-Avoidant component might measure actual problem-solving
skills such as generating alternatives. Elliott and colleagues (e.g., Elliott
et al., 1995; Elliott, Shewchuk, Richeson, et al., 1996) have proposed an inte-
grative model of problem solving and suggested that two problem-solving
components (Problem-Solving Confidence and Personal Control) best repre-
sent the initial problem- orientation phase of the social learning model (e.g.,
D’Zurilla, 1986), and Approach-Avoidance Style best represents the
problem-solving skills component. In our view, the data have not consis-
tently supported the integrative model of problem solving (e.g., Witty,
Heppner, Bernard, & Thoreson, 2001).
In short, problem-solving appraisal as measured by the PSI is conceptual-
ized as a person variable within the global person-environment model and
specifically a generalized set of beliefs or expectancies about applied prob-
lem solving. Moreover, as an expectancy the three PSI self-appraisal factors
have been conceptualized as constituting an individual’s problem-solving
style (Heppner & Lee, 2002). Thus, problem-solving appraisal has been con-
ceptualized as a general appraisal of one’s problem-solving style rather than
a specific appraisal of how one will cope with a specific problem, such as a
marital conflict or a work-related dispute. Bandura (1986) maintained that
both general and specific appraisals of oneself are key elements in
establishing perceptions of control.
This review will also reveal that problem-solving appraisal has been used
to test and confirm a wide range of theories and hypotheses of human behav-
ior. When problem solving has been operationalized as problem-solving
appraisal with the PSI, a wide range of theoretical predictions pertaining to
problem solving are confirmed. Some examples are the diathesis-stress-
hopelessness model of suicidal behavior (Schotte & Clum, 1982, 1987), the
social problem-solving model of depression (Nezu & Ronan, 1985), the
social problem-solving theory (D’Zurilla & Nezu, 1999), the cognitive
transactional theory of coping (Lazarus, 1966; Lazarus & Folkman 1984),

and the career maturity theory (Crites, 1978). In short, the PSI has been used
to test and confirm the role of problem solving within a broad range of theo-
retical frameworks of human behavior, thereby demonstrating the general
utility of the PSI in understanding human behavior.
PSYCHOLOGICAL ADJUSTMENT
It has been suggested repeatedly that ineffective problem solving results

in psychological maladjustment (e.g. Butler & Meichenbaum, 1981;
D’Zurilla & Goldfried, 1971; Heppner & Krauskopf, 1987; Heppner & Lee,
2002; Mechanic, 1968, 1970; Spivack & Shure, 1974). As Durlak (1983) has
noted, it is easy to accept the usefulness of effective problem-solving skills; it
makes intuitive sense that “good problem solvers . . . are flexible and adapt-
able in different social circumstances, able to deal effectively with stress, and
able to develop suitable methods to attain personal goals and satisfy their
needs” (p. 31). Conversely, ineffective problem solvers are less able to ade-
quately respond to problems and deal less effectively with their environment.
In the past 10 years, the empirical evidence has become increasingly clear
that problem solving or coping plays a role in adaptational responses to stress
(e.g., Friedman, 1992; Heppner & Baker, 1997; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984;
Smith, 1991; Wortman et al., 1992; Zeidner & Endler, 1996), although the
specific nature of the role continues to be investigated.
Research with the PSI supports a strong association between problem-
solving appraisal and a host of indices of psychological adjustment.
General Psychological and Social Adjustment
At least 24 studies have examined relations between problem-solving

appraisal and general indices of social and psychological adjustment. Eigh-
teen studies suggest that perceived ineffective (as opposed to effective) prob-
lem solvers report themselves to be less adjusted on measures assessing (a)
general psychological adjustment, such as the MMPI and SCL-90 (Elliott,
Herrick, & Witty, 1992; Hanson & Mintz, 1997; Heppner & Anderson, 1985;
Heppner, Kampa, & Brunning, 1987); (b) personality dispositions/styles,
specifically, self-concepts (Heppner et al., 1983), locus of control (S. W.
Cook & Heppner, 1997; Heppner & Petersen, 1982; Larson et al., 1990;
Nezu, 1985; Perez, Thoreson, Patton, & Heppner, 1997), and irrational
beliefs and dysfunctional thoughts (Heppner et al., 1982, 1987); (c) the fre-
quency of personal problems (Harrison, 1994; Heppner, Baumgardner, &
Jackson, 1985; Heppner et al., 1982; Nezu, 1985; Nezu & Ronan, 1985); (d)
individuation from parents (Fraser & Tucker, 1997); (e) resolution of grief

experiences (Reid & Dixon, 2000); and (f) racial identity statuses in African
American students (Neville, Heppner, & Wang, 1997). In addition, research
indicates that the PSI is related to different self-report indices of social skills.
Perceived ineffective (as opposed to effective) problem solvers reported hav-
ing (a) fewer social skills (Elliott, Godshall, Herrick, Witty, & Spruell, 1991;
Larson, 1984) and (b) more social uneasiness/distrust/distress (DeClue,
1983; Heppner et al., 1982; Larson, Allen, Imao, & Piersel, 1993; Sabourin
et al., 1990). Two studies also provided behavioral ratings from external
observers that confirmed the self-report findings (Heppner et al., 1982;
Larson, 1984).
Most of the research in this area has examined zero-order correlations
between problem-solving appraisal and psychological adjustment. However,
several studies indicate that there are more complex relations between
problem-solving appraisal and social and psychological adjustment. For
example, Hanson and Mintz (1997) used canonical correlations with a group
of older adults (mean age 77) and found that the majority of variance was
accounted for by two roots indicating that increases in psychological health
were related to more positive problem-solving appraisal. A third root, how-
ever, revealed that a tendency to both avoid problems and report a lack of per-
sonal control was related to increased interpersonal ties and relationships.
These results suggest that in some cases, there may be a dominant positive
relationship between problem-solving appraisal and psychological adjust-
ment as well as another independent relationship between a negative problem-
solving appraisal and the secondary interpersonal gains that might result
from interpersonal relationships.
Although there has been a strong association between problem-solving
appraisal and psychological distress, there is some evidence that the PSI fac-
tors may constitute more complex relationships among problem-solving
constructs in predicting psychological adjustment. Two studies found evi-
dence for a problem-solving mediational (PSM) model of psychological dis-
tress (Witty et al., 2001; Heppner et al., 2002). The PSM model posits that
one PSI factor, Problem-Solving Confidence, will mediate the relationship
between a second factor, Approach-Avoidance Style, in predicting psycho-
logical distress. The results suggested that although a person’s tendency to
avoid problems was directly related to psychological distress, that tendency
was associated with less problem-solving confidence, which, in turn, was
associated with more psychological distress. The PSM model was supported
across two very different samples (chronic low-back pain in adult patients in
the United States and Black South African college students). The PSM model
underscores not only the role of approaching or avoiding problems in pre-
dicting psychological distress but, more important, how an individual’s prob-

lem-solving confidence might mediate the relations between such an

approach-avoidance tendency and psychological distress.
Thus, there is a well-established association across 24 separate investiga-
tions between problem-solving appraisal and general indices of social and
psychological adjustment. Although these findings are based primarily on
White college students, they also included adult samples (Elliott et al., 1991;
Hanson & Mintz, 1997; Harrison, 1994; Sabourin et al., 1990), African
American samples (Harrison, 1994; Neville et al., 1997), and a Canadian
sample (Sabourin et al., 1990). The research provides strong support for ear-
lier researchers who theorized that ineffective problem solving is associated
with psychological maladjustment (e.g., Spivack & Shure, 1974).
Depression
Depression is a common and serious problem of enormous personal and
social significance. Millions of people around the world have been diagnosed
with depression. Depression is generally conceptualized as a complex, multi-
dimensional process hypothesized to result from an interplay between envi-
ronmental stress and psychosocial vulnerability or moderator factors (e.g.,
Hammen, 1985). In the late 1970s and early 1980s, researchers began identi-
fying psychosocial factors to explain why some individuals experience life
changes without becoming depressed but others become depressed in the
face of stress. Because problem solving was theorized to affect psychological
adjustment in general (e.g., Spivack & Shure, 1974), researchers began to
examine relations between problem solving and depression. The basic
hypothesis was that ineffective problem solving would likely result in
increased levels of depression.
Research from at least 35 studies suggests strong empirical support for a
relationship between problem-solving appraisal and depression across a
wide range of populations and research designs. This research strongly sup-
ports the hypothesis that the more a person perceives himself or herself to be
an ineffective problem solver, the more likely he or she will experience
increased levels of depression. More specifically, eight studies that used ex
post facto (between-groups) designs found that self-appraised effective (as
opposed to ineffective) problem solvers (which was the nonmanipulated sta-
tus variable) reported themselves to be significantly less depressed on a vari-
ety of depression inventories measuring short- and long-term depression,
such as the MMPI, Cornell Medical Index, Beck Depression Inventory, Zung
Depression Scale, and Feelings and Concerns Survey (Heppner & Anderson,
1985; Heppner et al., 1985, 1987; Nezu, 1985, 1986a; Nezu & Carnevale,
1987; Pretorius, 1996; Rich & Bonner, 1987).

Twenty-three other studies report significant zero-order correlations

between problem-solving appraisal and indices of depression; correlations
typically range between .30 and .60 across populations and cultures and
accounted for 9% to 36% of the variance in depression. For example, with
college students, significant correlations were typically found to range from
.41 to .67 across eight studies (e.g., Bonner & Rich, 1987, 1988; Brack,
LaClave, & Wyatt, 1992; Larson et al., 1990; Nezu & Nezu, 1987; Nezu,
Nezu, et al., 1986; Nezu, Nezu, Saraydarian, Kalmar, & Ronan, 1986; Nezu
& Ronan, 1985; Reid & Dixon, 2000; Rich & Bonner, 1987, 1989). (Note
that higher PSI scores indicate a negative problem-solving appraisal.) Simi-
lar statistically significant correlations were found with other populations,
such as prison inmates (r = –.52: Bonner & Rich, 1990), midwestern farmers
undergoing career transition (r = .21: S. W. Cook & Heppner, 1997), chronic
low back pain patients (r = .42: Witty et al., 2001), spinal-cord injured adults
(rs = .41, .50; Elliott et al., 1992), and family caregivers of stroke patients
(rs = .36-.54; Grant, Elliott, Giger, & Bartolucci, 2001). Likewise, when the
adolescent version of the PSI is used with adolescents, similar correlations
between the PSI and depression indices are found (r = .41: Perez et al., 1997).
Moreover, some studies have found similar associations between the PSI and
depression indices in other cultures, such as Turkey (r = .33: Sahin et al.,
1993), South Africa (rs = .28-.32: Heppner et al., 2002; Pretorius, 1992,
1996; Pretorius & Diedricks, 1994), French-speaking Canadian adolescents
(r = .53; Marcotte, Alain, & Gosselin, 1999), and Chinese adolescents (r =
.41; Cheng & Lam, 1997). In essence, there is very strong support for the
hypothesis that perceived ineffective problem solvers experience higher lev-
els of depression.
As early as 1985, investigators began to report more complex relation-
ships between problem-solving appraisal and depression. Nezu and Ronan
(1985) proposed a social problem-solving model of depression and hypothe-
sized that individual differences in the ability to solve interpersonal problems
would not only have a main effect on depression but also might moderate or
interact with the effects of negative life stress on depression. At least nine
studies have examined Nezu and Ronan’s model specifically by investigating
the moderating role of the PSI between stress and depression. Five of seven
studies (Cheng & Lam, 1997; Nezu, Nezu, et al., 1986; Nezu, Perri, Nezu, &
Mahoney, 1987; Nezu & Ronan, 1988; Rich & Bonner, 1987; vs. Pretorius
1992; Rich & Bonner, 1989) that directly tested for the moderating effects of
the PSI between stress and depression also supported the hypothesis. More-
over, problem-solving appraisal, negative life events, and the interaction
between the two variables accounted for a substantial amount of variance in
depression scores, typically between 40% and 60%.

Some studies used longitudinal designs to test the moderating effects of

problem solving and stress on depression. Nezu and Ronan (1988) controlled
for premorbid levels of depression and found that collectively, this model
accounted for 87% of the variance in time on two depression scores. In cross-
sectional and prospective analyses, Cheng and Lam (1997) also found that
problem solving moderated the relationship between life events as well as
difficulties and depression in Chinese adolescents. Along with self-esteem,
this accounted for between 53% and 59% of the variance in depression.
These studies provide very strong support for the moderating role of the PSI
between stress and depression. Other studies (Cheng & Lam, 1997; Elliott
et al., 1992; Nezu, Kalmar, Ronan, & Clavijo, 1986) have examined other
independent variables (attribution style, self-esteem, and social support) that
might interact with the PSI in predicting depression; these studies provided
some additional support for the moderating role of the PSI with these vari-
ables. Another study found that two PSI factors (Problem Solving Confi-
dence and Personal Control) augmented the prediction of postpartum depres-
sion, and these effects were not completely explained by trait affectivity
(Elliott, Schewchuk, Richeson, et al., 1996).
Thus, there is very strong support for Nezu and Ronan’s (1985) social
problem-solving model of depression and, generally, for the moderating role
of the PSI between stressful life events and depression as assessed with a
wide range of inventories. These results suggest that perceived ineffective (as
opposed to effective) problem solvers not only report higher levels of depres-
sion but also, under high levels of stress, report significantly higher levels of
depression. Thus, in predicting depression, it is important to consider not
only one’s problem-solving appraisal but also the interaction of the appraisal
with negative life events.
Finally, there is some evidence from longitudinal studies to suggest addi-
tional complexity in the relationship between problem-solving appraisal and
depression. W. A. Dixon et al. (1993) found that problem-solving appraisals
may play a role in developing depressive symptoms and depression itself
may cause temporary deficits in problem-solving appraisal. A second longi-
tudinal study (W. A. Dixon, 2000) found that self-appraised effective prob-
lem solvers were more likely to recover from depressive symptoms than were
self-appraised ineffective problem solvers. These studies provide evidence
for a reciprocal model between problem-solving appraisal and depression
(Nezu et al., 1989).
These results support the notion that perceived ineffective problem solv-
ing is related to increased levels of depression. Given the consistent evidence,
there is little value in continuing to examine zero-order relationships between
problem-solving appraisal and depression, except perhaps in cross-cultural

studies that examine the universal nature of this relationship in very different
contexts. Beyond the main effect of the PSI in predicting depression, the evi-
dence also suggests that consistent with Nezu and Ronan’s (1985) theory,
problem-solving appraisal has more complex relations with depression, such
as moderating and reciprocal roles. Such complex relationships as well as
other more complex structural models merit additional attention to test their
applicability across situations, populations, and cultures. Given there are at
least 7 million women and 3.5 million men in the United States with diag-
nosed depression (McGrath, Keita, Strickland, & Russo, 1990), and many
more around the world, this area of research seems particularly important
from an intervention perspective.
Hopelessness and Suicidality

Suicide and suicidal behavior is an increasing concern in the United
States, attracting increased attention from researchers, academicians, and
therapists (Rudd, Rajab, & Dahm, 1994). According to Gelman (1994), each
year, 250,000 Americans attempt suicide and approximately 30,000 commit
suicide, accounting for 1% of all deaths in the United States. One theory of
suicidal behavior that has received considerable attention in the literature is
Schotte and Clum’s (1982, 1987) diathesis-stress-hopelessness model.
According to this model, when people who are deficient in problem-solving
abilities are exposed to naturally occurring conditions of high negative life
stress, they are cognitively unable to develop effective alternative solutions
for adaptive coping, resulting in hopelessness. Hopelessness, one of the best
predictors of suicidal behavior (Schotte & Clum, 1987), is postulated to put
the individual at increased risk for suicidal behavior (Rudd et al., 1996).
At least 12 studies have examined the relationship between problem-solv-
ing appraisal, hopelessness, and suicidal ideation to test aspects of Schotte
and Clum’s theory. Three of these studies have been cross-sectional, descrip-
tive studies with college samples (Bonner & Rich, 1987, 1988; W. A. Dixon,
Heppner, & Anderson, 1991); one was a longitudinal descriptive study with a
college sample (Priester & Clum, 1993), two have been cross-sectional
descriptive studies with special nonclinical samples (Bonner & Rich, 1992;
Wright & Heppner, 1991), and six have been cross-sectional descriptive
studies with clinical samples (Cannon et al., 1999; Clum & Febbraro, 1994;
W. A. Dixon, Heppner, & Rudd, 1994; Ellis, Rudd, Rajab, & Wehrly, 1996;
Rudd et al., 1996; Witty et al., 2001).
These 12 studies provide strong support for the diathesis-stress-
hopelessness model of Schotte and Clum (1982, 1987); moreover, they indi-
cate that problem-solving appraisal is a consistent and stable predictor of
hopelessness and suicide ideation. Perceived ineffective problem-solving

scores are associated with increases in hopelessness (Bonner & Rich, 1987,
1988, 1992; Cannon et al., 1999; W. A. Dixon et al., 1991, 1994; Priester &
Clum, 1993; Rudd et al., 1996; Witty et al., 2001) and suicide ideation
(Bonner & Rich, 1987; Clum & Febbraro, 1994; W. A. Dixon et al., 1991,
1994; Rudd et al., 1996; Wright & Heppner, 1991). Because hopelessness is
one of the best predictors of suicidality, Cannon et al. (1999) examined a
range of potential predictors of hopelessness. Although a number of predic-
tors were associated with hopelessness, only dysfunctional cognitions and
problem-solving appraisal offered nonredundant prediction of hopelessness
scores and accounted for 20% of the variance. Moreover, consistent with
Schotte and Clum’s theory, across all of the studies that measured both
hopelessness and suicide ideation, there was a stronger association between
problem-solving appraisal and hopelessness (rs = .47 to .62) than between
problem-solving appraisal and suicide ideation (rs = .11 to .43). This indi-
rectly indicated that problem-solving appraisal is associated with suicide
ideation primarily through its impact on hopelessness.
In addition, as predicted by Schotte and Clum’s model, self-appraised
negative problem solvers under high levels of stress were especially likely to
report high levels of hopelessness in three of six studies (Bonner & Rich,
1992; Clum & Febbraro, 1994; Priester & Clum, 1993). One explanation for
the absence of the interaction in the other three studies is that general mea-
sures of stress (e.g., scores on the Life Events Survey, which measures stress
in the year preceding its assessment) were not proximal to the time when
problem-solving appraisal was measured to be differentially affected by the
stress. Priester and Clum (1993) hypothesized that only stresses that are rela-
tively recent would be moderated by problem-solving appraisal in regard to
its effect on adjustment, such as hopelessness and suicidality. Two studies
support this interpretation (Bonner & Rich, 1992; Priester & Clum, 1993).
When researchers examined the predictive utility of the three PSI factors,
Problem-Solving Confidence was found to have the strongest association
with hopelessness and suicidal ideation (W. A. Dixon et al., 1991, Dixon
et al., 1994; Priester & Clum, 1993). However, Clum and Febbraro (1994)
found more complex patterns across the PSI factors; they found that both
individuals who lacked Problem-Solving Confidence and individuals who
approached problems were more likely to report high levels of suicidal
ideation under high levels of stress. Although this seemingly contradictory
finding could be an artifact of the sample, it might also suggest more complex
dynamics across the PSI factors.
W. A. Dixon et al. (1994) directly tested and found strong support for the
mediational role of hopelessness between problem solving and suicidal
ideation. Consistent with Schotte and Clum’s theory, the W. A. Dixon et al.
(1994) study found that problem-solving appraisal was related to suicide

ideation primarily through its effect on hopelessness. While problem-solving

appraisal had a small but significant direct path to suicide ideation—indi-
rectly through its impact on hopelessness—it accounted for 68% of the vari-
ance in suicidal ideation. Suicide is very difficult to predict; however, pre-
dicting 68% of the variance in suicidal ideation is a very substantial finding.
These results suggest when a person does not think he or she can cope with
life’s problems, he or she is likely to become hopeless and hopelessness is
what primarily puts the person at risk for suicidal ideation.
Finally, Ellis et al. (1996) cluster analyzed the data from a group of sui-
cidal psychiatric outpatients and found four personality profiles that sup-
ported earlier efforts to differentiate clinical subgroups of suicidal patients.
The four groups were also validated by examining demographics, diagnoses,
and scores on several psychological scales. Consistent with previous
research, three of the four subgroups had mean PSI scores above normal
adult scores; moreover, the PSI was useful in differentiating the subgroups in
conceptually consistent patterns with other measures to distinguish avoidant,
antisocial, and histrionic styles. Although the results of this study were con-
sistent with earlier research on this topic, this study is noteworthy in that it
identified different levels of problem-solving appraisal across the four sub-
groups. This suggests the relation between problem-solving appraisal and
suicidal ideation is not a simple linear relationship but is related to a unique
constellation of personality patterns.
In sum, consistent with Schotte and Clum’s theory, our review indicates
that problem-solving appraisal is a significant predictor of hopelessness and
suicide ideation. More specifically, perceptions of ineffective problem solv-
ing are associated with increased hopelessness and suicide ideation across a
variety of predominately White populations including college students, cor-
rectional inmates, psychiatric patients, and outpatient suicide ideators and
attempters. Moreover, as predicted by Schotte and Clum’s model, poor self-
appraised problem solvers under high levels of stress were especially likely
to report high levels of hopelessness in three of six studies. In nonclinical
populations, problem-solving appraisal generally accounted for a statisti-
cally significant but small variance in suicidal ideation (e.g., 1.3% in Bonner
& Rich, 1987; 1.4% in W. A. Dixon et al., 1991) but for considerably larger
variance in suicide ideation among suicidal patients (e.g., 21% in Rudd et al.,
1996). Thus, while most people with a negative problem-solving appraisal
are not suicidal, most suicidal individuals have a negative problem-solving
appraisal. It may be that stress and a negative problem-solving appraisal are
necessary but not sufficient to produce hopelessness and, in turn, suicidality.
Most likely, there are other intervening variables (e.g., lack of social support
and reasons for living and alcohol and substance abuse) that may make some
people with a negative problem-solving appraisal vulnerable to becoming

hopeless and suicidal when they experience high levels of stress. Moreover, it
is likely that the path to suicidal ideation is multidimensional and may vary
across levels of ideation severity (Bonner & Rich, 1987). It may be that the
relationship between suicide and problem-solving appraisal is also recipro-
cal. A negative problem-solving appraisal may lead to increases in hopeless-
ness and suicide ideation, and increases in hopelessness and suicide ideation
may lead to a temporary decrease in appraised problem-solving
effectiveness.
Anxiety and Worry
“Anxiety disorders are shockingly common” (Barlow, 2000, p. 1248).

The prevalence of anxiety disorders in the United States far exceeds affective
disorders or substance abuse disorders (Kessler et al., 1994), and anxiety dis-
orders are often chronic, lasting decades or even lifetimes (Goisman et al.,
1998). Thus, researchers have examined the hypothesis that ineffective prob-
lem solvers would have increased levels of anxiety. Eight studies have found
a consistent association between problem-solving appraisal and anxiety
(Carscaddon, Poston, & Sachs, 1988; Davey, Hampton, Farrell, & Davidson,
1992; Heppner et al., 1987; Larson et al., 1990; Nezu, 1985, 1986b; Sahin
et al., 1993; Tracey et al., 1986), measured by different inventories (e.g.,
MMPI, SCL-90 State-Trait Anxiety Inventory). The samples consisted of
predominantly White U.S. college students, except for the Sahin et al. study
of Turkish students and the study by Davey et al. of White English college
students and older returning students. Moreover, there appears to be a stron-
ger relationship between problem-solving appraisal and trait (r = .45-.51) as
opposed to state (r = .35-.42) anxiety. (This same pattern is found with state
and trait measures of anger and curiosity, and a positive problem-solving
appraisal was associated with less anger and more curiosity [Carscaddon
et al., 1988].)
When relationships were examined among the PSI factors and anxiety,
trait anxiety and trait anger were most strongly correlated with Problem-
Solving Confidence and Personal Control (Carscaddon et al., 1988), even
after worrying was removed from the analyses (Davey et al., 1992). These
results suggest that trait anxiety is more related to two of the PSI factors
(Problem Solving Confidence and Personal Control) and that problem-
solving appraisal is a more stable, dispositional construct rather than a state-
like construct.
Given the prevalence of clients who suffer from anxiety disorders, it may
be beneficial to examine the role of problem-solving appraisal in both the eti-
ology of anxiety disorders and subsequent coping processes. For example,

worrying is a primary diagnostic criterion for general anxiety disorders and

seems to play a central role in how people cope with anxiety (Barlow, 2000).
Consistent with this view, research has found that perceived ineffective
problem-solving appraisal was associated with increased worrying (Davey,
1994; Davey et al., 1992; Dugas, Letarte, Rheaume, Freeston, & Ladouceur,
1995; Wang, Heppner, & Berry, 1997) or more beliefs about consequences of
worry (Davey, Tallis, & Capuzzo, 1996). Four of these five studies were con-
ducted with French Canadian (Dugas et al., 1995) and English college stu-
dents (Davey and his colleagues). When relationships were examined with
the PSI factors, three studies found that only the Problem-Solving Confi-
dence and Personal Control factors were related to worry (Davey, 1994;
Davey et al. 1992, Dugas et al., 1995); conversely, two other studies found all
three PSI factors related to worry (Davey et al., 1996; Wang et al., 1997). In
sum, nine studies documented a strong relationship between anxiety and
problem-solving appraisal, and five studies related worry and problem-
solving appraisal. Thus, it may be informative to examine both the role of
worrying and problem-solving appraisal in coping with anxiety and anxiety
disorders. Moreover, it may be useful clinically and theoretically to examine
if problem-solving appraisal plays moderating, mediating, and/or reciprocal
roles with anxiety.
Alcohol Use/Abuse
Cognitive-social learning approaches to drug and alcohol abuse theorize
that abuse is largely the result of having few coping strategies for dealing
with situations that are appraised as stressful and having expectations that a
drug will help in coping (e.g., Bandura, 1977, 1986; Lazarus & Folkman,
1984). It has been hypothesized that individuals who lack a sense of self-
efficacy for coping with stressful situations are more likely to resort to alco-
hol and drugs as an emotion-focused coping strategy to alter personal feel-
ings of inadequacy (Annis & Davis, 1989; Marlatt & Gordon, 1985). More-
over, Wills and Hirky’s (1996) coping model of substance abuse posits, in
part, that avoidance, as opposed to approach coping, plays a central role in
substance abuse. Consistent with these models and hypotheses, it would be
expected that problem-solving appraisal would have an association with
alcohol use and abuse.
Five studies have assessed the role of problem-solving appraisal with
alcohol/drug use among college students, and a sixth has examined this rela-
tionship with a group of inpatient alcoholics. All studies have been descrip-
tive and correlational and thus provide only an indirect test of applications of
Bandura’s (1986) theory for alcohol use. Consistent with the theory, three of

the six studies (Godshall & Elliott, 1997; Heppner et al., 1982; Wright &
Heppner, 1991) suggest a significant linear relationship between problem-
solving appraisal and alcohol use/abuse. Another study (Larson & Heppner,
1989) suggests that as a group, inpatient alcoholics appraised their problem
solving considerably more negatively than nonclinical adults.
However, there is some evidence that the relationship between problem-
solving appraisal and the frequency of alcohol use may be more complex
than depicted by zero-order relationships. For example, Williams and
Kleinfelter (1989) did not find a significant association between problem-
solving appraisal and frequency of alcohol use in undergraduate students but
rather found more complex relations through canonical analysis. One canon-
ical variate indicated that a lack of problem-solving confidence and a ten-
dency to avoid problems were related to the use of alcohol to control negative
emotions and escape problems. The second variate indicated students who
lacked confidence but approached their problems reported that they drank to
control negative emotions and enhance their mood. Larson and Heppner
(1989) examined a clinical sample of inpatient alcoholics and found that the
PSI did not correlate with severity of alcohol abuse, with the exception of pre-
vious number of alcohol treatments. (Given the relatively high frequency of
alcohol abuse, ceiling effects may have mitigated against finding significant
correlations with the PSI.) Moreover, despite some individuals’ scoring high
(i.e., a negative problem-solving appraisal) on the PSI as a group, Larson and
Heppner (1989) noted that their PSI scores in the alcoholic sample indicated
a very positive problem-solving appraisal; interviews with these individuals
revealed that they were overapproaching and perseverating their problems.
Thus, at least some individuals who perceived their problem-solving
appraisal to be very positive also had significant problems with alcohol
abuse; this finding is consistent with Williams and Kleinfelter (1989), who
found that both high and low PSI scores were related to drinking patterns. A
final study (Slavkin, Heimberg, Winning, & McCaffrey, 1992) also did not
find a linear relationship between the PSI and alcohol intake/abuse, but rather
an interaction between alcohol abuse and parental drinking (i.e., students
who reported more alcohol abuse and whose parents had problems with
drinking had more negative problem-solving appraisal).
In sum, consistent with theories by Wills and Hirky (1996) and Bandura
(1986), three of the six studies suggest a significant linear relationship
between problem-solving appraisal and alcohol use/abuse. Another study
suggests that as a group, inpatient alcoholics score significantly more nega-
tively on the PSI than nonclinical adults. Moreover, three of the studies sug-
gest more complex relationships between problem-solving appraisal and
alcohol use/abuse and that there may be different drinking patterns associ-

ated with the PSI factors. Although some of the research supports a signifi-
cant linear relationship between problem-solving appraisal and alcohol use/
abuse, there is also evidence to suggest more complex relationships among
these variables. The relationships between problem-solving appraisal and
alcohol use/abuse also may be clouded by common psychological defenses
of alcoholics, such as denial, rationalization, excuse making, and minimizing
(e.g., Wilson, 1987). Future research might address this area by avoiding reli-
ance on self-report measures and focusing on legal documents, medical
records, work history, and collaborative data from spouses or family
members.
Eating Disorders
Although the etiology of eating disorders is conceptualized as being
multifactorial (Striegel-Moore & Cachelin, 2001), personal vulnerability
factors have long been regarded as important contributing factors (Striegel-
Moore & Cachelin, 1999). In fact, it has been proposed that individuals at risk
for eating disorders are vulnerable not only because of stress but also because
of poor problem solving (Striegel-Moore, Silberstein, & Rodin, 1986). Sub-
sequently, research has examined whether problem-solving appraisal might
be one factor that differentiates women with and without eating disorders.
Specifically, two studies examined U.S. women who were clinically diag-
nosed according to DSM-III and DSM-III-R diagnostic criteria (American
Psychiatric Association, 1987) as having an eating disorder. Etringer,
Altmaier, and Bowers (1989) found bulimic women to have statistically sig-
nificant higher PSI scores (PSI Total and all three factors) than a nonbulimic
control group. Soukup, Beiler, and Terrell (1990) found both bulimic and
anorexic women (as opposed to those women without an eating disorder) to
have statistically higher PSI scores on the PSI Total and specifically on the
Problem-Solving Confidence and Approach-Avoidance Style factors. These
studies suggest that women with eating disorders scored higher on the PSI
than normal-eating comparison groups. An unpublished study conducted in
Italy (Campanelli, Bove, & D’Annunzio, 1993) reported a group of women
experiencing bulimia for an average of 5 years had a total PSI score of 147, a
very negative problem-solving appraisal and the highest mean PSI score of
all the samples found in the literature.
In sum, three studies link a negative problem-solving appraisal in women
with eating disorders in both U.S. and Italian samples. Thus, problem-
solving appraisal is associated with a specific type of psychological disorder
and may play a role in how individuals cope with various risk factors related
to eating disorders in at least two cultures.

Childhood Adjustment
Although it has been well documented that learning occurs through

modeling (Bandura, 1986), a slightly different question is whether parents’
problem-solving appraisal might affect children’s psychological adjustment.
If such a relationship could be found, it might suggest a number of remedial
and preventive treatment interventions.
For example, there is some evidence of a link between mothers’ problem-
solving appraisal and children’s social and behavioral adjustment (Reis &
Heppner, 1993; Walker & Johnson, 1986). Walker and Johnson (1986) used a
prospective longitudinal design to examine the relation between mothers’
problem-solving appraisal and preschool (age 5) children’s social and emo-
tional development. The mothers’ problem-solving appraisal was correlated
with a global self-rating of confidence in parenting and with two indices of
children’s social and emotional development as rated by independent observ-
ers on the Child Behavior Checklist (Achenbach & Edelbrock, 1983). More
positive problem-solving appraisal of mothers, particularly on the Personal
Control factor, was associated with higher levels of children’s social
competence and fewer behavioral problems.
Another study examined mother-daughter dyads from incestuous versus
matched nonclinical families (Reis & Heppner, 1993). Consistent with previ-
ous clinical observations (e.g., Courtois, 1988; Finkelhor, 1979) and a family
systems model (McCubbin & Patterson, 1982), the results revealed that
mothers of incest victims (as compared with mothers from the nonclinical
group) had significantly more negative appraisals of their problem-solving
effectiveness, most notably in terms of their Problem-Solving Confidence
and Personal Control. It has also been suggested that because of mothers’
ineffectiveness, daughters involved in incest assumed more responsibility to
compensate for the mother (Geiser, 1979; Meiselman, 1978); Reis and
Heppner (1993) found patterns in the problem-solving variables consistent
with this notion of role reversal. The more negatively the mothers from the
incest group appraised their problem solving, the more their daughters posi-
tively appraised themselves as approaching problems; the more the mothers
from the incest group perceived themselves as avoiding problems and lack-
ing personal control, the more their daughters reported engaging in direct
coping behaviors.
Other research has examined the relations between mothers’ parenting
and problem-solving appraisal. Shorkey, McRoy, and Armendariz (1985)
used a sample of 40 culturally diverse mothers (12 Latina, 15 White, and 13
African American), drawn from seven day care centers, with children from 3
to 5 years of age. Mothers with a more negative problem-solving appraisal
tended to be less rational and reported using more corporal punishment. Sim-

ilarly, another study based on Black South African samples (Pretorius, 1996)
found that positive problem-solving appraisal was associated with family
environments characterized by helpful and supportive relationships, encour-
agement for open displays of emotions and behavior, and a low level of
interpersonal conflict.
Two studies provide evidence that parents’ problem-solving appraisal is
related to children’s behavior. Walker and Johnson (1986) provide particu-
larly important evidence that parents’ problem-solving appraisal is related to
independent behavioral ratings of children’s social and emotional develop-
ment. Two other studies with a culturally diverse U.S. sample and a Black
South African sample indicate parental problem-solving appraisal was
related to the family environment and corporal punishment. These four stud-
ies suggest that parents’ problem-solving appraisal may be related to family
environments, parental punishment, and children’s social and behavioral
development. If research is able to continue to find associations between
parental problem-solving appraisal, family environments, and child rearing
styles, researchers might examine the utility of problem-solving training as a
preventive intervention for a range of childhood psychological problems.
Research might also explore the potential relationship between problem-
solving appraisal and parental management of children’s medical problems
because parental problem solving has been identified as an important compo-
nent of children’s adjustment to a medical problem (e.g., Peterson, 1989).
The role of problem-solving appraisal in parenting is relatively unexplored
but may be useful in developing a range of remedial and preventive training
interventions.
Childhood Trauma
Research has indicated that life events and traumas affect how people
cope with subsequent traumatic events. Moreover, it has been hypothesized
that stressful events and traumas may be risk factors in developing mal-
adaptive coping styles and even psychopathology (Resick, 2001). Although
previously discussed theories (e.g., the diathesis-stress-hopelessness theory
of suicidality) have implicated ineffective problem solving as a risk factor
predicting psychological maladjustment, it also may be possible that trau-
matic events are so emotionally powerful that they affect one’s subsequent
problem-solving style.
Two areas of research have examined the relationships between childhood
traumas and problem-solving appraisal: (a) childhood sexual abuse (incest)
and (b) parental alcoholism. Reis and Heppner (1993) found that adolescent
(mean age = 15 years) incest victims reported more negative problem-

solving appraisal compared with matched controls without incestuous back-

grounds. In an unpublished study, Van Vliet (1996) examined the effect of
childhood sexual abuse in adult women and found that sexually abused
women reported more negative problem-solving appraisals than did women
who had not been victims of incest. These studies suggest that a childhood
trauma of incest is associated with a more negative problem-solving
appraisal during adolescence as well as in adulthood.
In the past 15 years, helping professionals have shown increased interest
in adults who were involved in trauma related to their parents’ alcoholism
(see Sher, 1991; West & Prinz, 1987). Initially, a great deal was written about
the personality characteristics of adult children of alcoholics (ACA), such as
inability to trust, difficulty in identifying and expressing feelings,
hypervigilance, and concern for boundary issues (e.g., Black, 1982; Cermak,
1986; Woititz 1985). On the basis of clinical observations, ACAs were also
characterized as having difficulty with processing information and decision
making and lacking adequate coping skills (e.g., S. I. Miller & Tuchfeld,
1986; Woititz, 1985).
Wright and Heppner (1991) examined if there were differences between
ACAs and non-ACAs (both nonclinical groups) in problem-solving
appraisal; they found the two groups did not differ on the PSI or any of its
three factors. Wright and Heppner (1993) replicated these findings with
another sample; more important, they also found that a history of family dys-
function was more predictive of problem-solving appraisal (and psychologi-
cal adjustment in general) than was parental alcoholism. In sum, problem-
solving appraisal did not differentiate nonclinical ACA from non-ACA
college students. Wright and Heppner (1991, 1993) indicated that their data
suggested a great deal of variability in nonclinical ACAs and that it was an
oversimplification and stereotype to assume that all ACAs tend to have
maladaptive problem-solving skills. Future research might examine the role
of problem-solving appraisal with clinical ACAs and the longitudinal differ-
ences between clinical and nonclinical ACAs over time. Thus, the results of
these studies suggest that being the child in a family involved in parental alco-
holism is not necessarily associated with a more negative problem-solving
appraisal.
In sum, three of the four studies reviewed provide preliminary evidence
suggesting that problem-solving appraisal may be associated with childhood
traumas, such as incest and dysfunctional family environments; these studies
support that stressful and traumatic experiences may have a subsequent
effect on one’s problem-solving appraisal. These studies are consistent with
research that has suggested that traumatic events affect coping with subse-
quent traumatic events (see Resick, 2001).

Instrumentality and Expressiveness
E. P. Cook (1990) hypothesized that gender-related personality variables

“may affect what psychological problems people develop, associated symp-
toms, and how people respond to problems” (p. 371). Two gender-related
variables have received considerable attention, instrumentality (formerly
labeled masculinity) and expressiveness (formerly labeled femininity) (see
Spence, 1991). Instrumentality is considered to measure agency, self-effi-
cacy, and assertiveness, whereas expressiveness is typically conceptualized
as interpersonally oriented expressive qualities, such as nurturing, caring,
and understanding others (Spence, 1991). A review of the literature revealed
that instrumentality and, to a lesser extent, expressiveness have been posi-
tively associated with a wide range of psychological adjustment indices (E. P.
Cook, 1990).
With regard to E. P. Cook’s hypothesis, intuitively, it makes sense that
agency or self-efficacy would relate to problem solving. Moreover, it would
seem that expressing oneself and understanding others may be very useful in
problem solving, especially for interpersonal problems. Researchers have
examined the relations between problem-solving appraisal with both instru-
mentality and expressiveness (Brems & Johnson, 1989; Heppner, Walther, &
Good, 1995; McCracken & Weitzman, 1997; Nezu & Nezu, 1987; Wang
et al., 1997). All five studies found a consistent association between a more
positive problem-solving appraisal and high levels of instrumentality. One
study found that problem-solving appraisal mediated the relationship
between instrumentality and both intrapersonal and interpersonal indices of
psychological adjustment; however, the same relationship was not found
with expressiveness (Wang et al., 1997). Two of the five studies (Heppner,
Walther, et al., 1995; Wang et al., 1997) also found a more positive problem-
solving appraisal was also related to high levels of expressiveness. Different
patterns of results have been found with the PSI factors. One study found
both Problem-Solving Confidence and Approach-Avoidance Style to be
related to instrumentality (Brems & Johnson, 1989), whereas another study
found all three factors correlated with instrumentality; only the Approach
Avoidance factor was related to expressiveness (Heppner, Walther, et al.,
1995).
Although problem-solving appraisal was consistently more strongly
associated with instrumentality than with expressiveness, it does not seem
warranted to disregard the relationship between expressiveness and problem-
solving appraisal. It would seem that expressing oneself and understanding
others may provide information for problem solving and thus increase one’s
effectiveness in approach problems (Heppner, Walther, et al., 1995). Future
researchers might use clustering strategies (e.g., cluster analysis) to identify

relations between problem-solving appraisal and gender-related variables

across different subtypes of people as well as in relationship to psychological
adjustment indices, such as loneliness, assertiveness, and marital satisfac-
tion. In other words, expressiveness may be more strongly associated with
problem-solving appraisal in some people than in others and be related to
some indices of psychological adjustment but not others. In short, five stud-
ies indicate a consistent relationship between problem-solving appraisal and
instrumentality, and one study suggests problem-solving appraisal mediates
the well-established relationship between instrumentality and psychological
adjustment. Only two studies suggest a relationship between problem-
solving appraisal and expressiveness. Research that examines the more
complex relations between gender-related variables and problem-solving
appraisal may provide useful information.
PHYSICAL HEALTH
Health psychology has amply demonstrated the importance of

psychosocial factors in physical health (e.g., Anderson, Kiecolt-Glaser, &
Glaser, 1994; Kiecolt-Glaser & Glaser, 1995). Moreover, it has been sug-
gested that problem solving plays a role in the recovery of brain-injured
patients (Ben-Yishay & Prigatano, 1990) and in disease progression of can-
cer patients (Meyer & Mark, 1995). The focus of this section is on whether
problem-solving appraisal is associated with physical health. At least 13
studies have examined the relationship between problem-solving appraisal
and three health-related issues: (a) physical health complaints and health pro-
motion, (b) physical health complications, and (c) physical limitations such
as traumatic brain injury. The data from research in this section will lead to
the conclusion that problem-solving appraisal is associated with a range of
physical health indices and, importantly, additional behavioral evidence
linking problem-solving appraisal and human adjustment.
Physical Health Complaints and Health Promotion

Using primarily a social problem-solving theory (D’Zurilla, 1986;
D’Zurilla & Nezu, 1999), eight studies have examined the relationship
between problem-solving appraisal and physical health complaints as well as
health promotion. Consistent with the theory, the results suggest that
problem-solving appraisal was (a) associated with health expectancies
(Elliott & Marmarosh, 1994) and (b) related to specific health complaints,
such as chronic pain (Witty et al., 2001) and cardiovascular problems
(Heppner et al., 1987) and health problems in general (Elliott & Marmarosh,

1994; Tracey et al., 1986). In all cases, a more negative problem-solving

appraisal was associated with more health complaints and lower health
expectancies. In addition, a negative problem-solving appraisal was associ-
ated with the lack of health promotion behaviors in rural adolescent
women (Felton, Liu, Parsons, & Geslani, 1998). The associations between
problem-solving appraisal and the self-reported health indicators typically
accounted for between 5% and 11% of the variance. In studies that examined
components of problem-solving appraisal, scores indicating less Personal
Control were mostly associated with more physical health complaints
(Elliott, 1992; Elliott & Maramarosh, 1994; Godshall & Elliott, 1997; Grant
et al., 2001; Witty et al., 2001). Thus, the Personal Control factor seems to be
most sensitive to physical health complaints.
Physical Health Complications
Again following a social problem-solving theory (D’Zurilla, 1986;

D’Zurilla & Nezu, 1999), research has been conducted in a medical setting
with behavioral measures of medical outcome (Herrick et al., 1994). Consis-
tent with theoretical predictions, Herrick et al. (1994) found that a tendency
to approach problems was predictive of better objective behavioral health
outcomes 1 year later (e.g., in patients with decubitus ulcers and urinary tract
infections). The authors reasoned that patients more likely to approach prob-
lems would also “be more likely to attend to behavioral self-care regimens
that encompass routine pressure reliefs, good nutritional habits, daily skin
inspections, and hygienic bladder management techniques at regular inter-
vals” (p. 279). This study was the first to associate the Approach-Avoidance
style “with health outcomes believed to be mediated in part by behavioral
mechanism” (Herrick et al., 1994, p. 279). Methodologically, these results
underscore the utility of examining the role of specific PSI factors as opposed
to combining the factors into a total score, especially as the factors may have
contrasting roles.
Traumatic Brain Injuries

People with acquired brain damage through traumatic brain injuries (TBI)
encounter a range of difficulties in performing everyday tasks, such as pre-
paring meals and paying bills; thus, in this population, problem-solving defi-
cits can impair real-life functioning (Rath et al., 2000). Sometimes, individu-
als with TBI perform within normal limits of conventional neuro-
psychological measures of problem solving but exhibit significant problem-
solving deficits in performing daily life tasks. To further explore the prob-
lem-solving assessment of TBI patients, Rath et al. (2000) compared TBI

patients and uninjured controls on two standard neuropsychological prob-

lem-solving measures and the PSI. The results revealed that the two
neuropsychological tests did not differentiate the two groups, but the PSI did
successfully differentiate the TBI patients from uninjured controls. Similar
results were reported by Rath, Langenbahn, et al. (in press). The PSI once
again differentiated TBI patients from uninjured controls, this time when
education, age, and depression were controlled. In addition, the PSI was
related to the performance of both patients and significant others on timed
attention tasks as well as significant others’ (but not patients’) memory
scores.
In the second study reported in Rath et al. (2000), the authors sought to
assess problem-solving gains following outpatient cognitive rehabilitation.
Again, they found the two conventional neuropsychological measures of
problem solving were not sensitive to improvements following the outpatient
rehabilitation, but again, the PSI was sensitive in detecting treatment changes
in the TBI patients’ problem solving. This finding was replicated in another
study (Rath, Simon, Langenbahn, Sherr, & Diller, in press).
A fourth study by Rath et al. (2003) examined the utility of different
problem-solving measures in identifying TBI patients whose cognitive defi-
cits contribute to the disruption of meaningful life activities, such as main-
taining a home, returning to work, or functioning in the community. Specifi-
cally, Rath et al. (2003) compared TBI patients with normal adults on three
problem-solving measures: the PSI, a projective problem-solving measure,
and a traditional neuropsychological measure of problem solving. Although
all three problem-solving measures differentiated TBI patients from normal
adults, only the PSI indicated a large effect size (Cohen’s d = –.90). A very
important treatment decision for health care professionals is to determine
TBI patients’ ability to function in the community. Using the most widely
used comprehensive measure of community integration (Community Inte-
gration Questionnaire; Willer, Ottenbacher, & Coad, 1994), only the PSI was
a significant predictor of independence and integration in the community
(accounting for an additional 13% of the variance beyond educational level).
In analyzing the PSI factors, Problem-Solving Confidence predicted 20% of
the variance beyond educational level. Finally, when using significant others’
report of community integration, Problem-Solving Confidence was again a
significant predictor and, with education level, accounted for 25% of the
variance in others’ reports of community integration. “Thus, in comparison
to the most frequently used neuropsychological measures of problem solving
(see Rabin, 2001), problem-solving self-appraisal was a better predictor of
community integration” (p. 141).
In sum, four studies consistently indicated that problem-solving appraisal
was not only the most successful measure to differentiate brain-injured

adults from noninjured adults but also the best predictor of community inte-
gration (even over standard neuropsychological measures of problem solv-
ing). Thus, these results suggest that the “evaluation of functioning problem-
solving deficits can be enhanced by using social problem solving
approaches” such as the PSI (Rath et al., 2000, p. 730).
COPING
How people cope with their personal problems and process information—
how they think, feel, and behave when grappling with a real-life problem—is
a complex and dynamic process (Heppner & Hillerbrand, 1991). Is there any
evidence that problem-solving appraisal is linked to specific cognitive, affec-
tive, or behavioral activities associated with how people cope with stressful
life events?
Hypothetical or Laboratory Problem Solving
One way researchers have attempted to examine how people cope or solve
problems is to present participants with hypothetical or laboratory problems
and study how participants respond to them. However, some researchers
(e.g., Wickelgren, 1974) have maintained that hypothetical or laboratory cre-
ations differ from real-life personal problems along several dimensions. For
example, stressful life problems usually contain more emotional elements,
particularly anxiety. Thus, it is questionable whether generalization from
laboratory problems is warranted.
Nine studies examined the relations between problem-solving appraisal
and hypothetical or laboratory problem-solving tasks (Baumgardner,
Heppner & Arkin, 1986; Davey, 1994; Heppner & Petersen, 1982; Larson
et al., 1995; Larson & Sailors, 1997; Mayo & Tanaka-Matsumi, 1996; Moss,
1983; Nezu & Ronan, 1988; Sarmány & Sládeková, 1990). The findings
were inconsistent. Two studies did not find differences across levels of
problem-solving appraisal (Heppner & Petersen, 1982; Moss, 1983), while
three others did (Davey, 1994; Nezu & Ronan, 1988; Sarmány & Sládeková,
1990), and four other studies provided more complex findings
(Baumgardner et al., 1986; Larson et al., 1995; Larson & Sailors, 1997;
Mayo & Tanaka-Matsumi, 1996).
For example, Heppner and Petersen (1982) initially investigated whether
problem-solving appraisal was related to generating steps for solving hypo-
thetical story problems, as measured by the first three stories of the Means-
End Problem Solving Procedure (MEPS) (Platt & Spivack, 1975); the results
revealed that the PSI was unrelated to MEPS scores. Conversely, two studies

that used six of the stories of the MEPS found that the Approach-Avoidance
Style scale was related to the MEPS (Davey, 1994) and that there was a sub-
stantial relationship between the total scores of the two measures (r = –.69;
Nezu & Ronan, 1988). The results of these two studies suggest that self-
appraised effective problem solvers generated more means or steps in solv-
ing the story problems. Nezu and Ronan (1988) suggested the restricted
range of scores from three stories in the Heppner and Petersen (1982) study
might explain the differential results. Another study (Sarmány & Sládeková,
1990) examined performance on computer tasks under two conditions (feed-
back and no feedback), as well as by levels of problem-solving appraisal;
their results revealed no differences in the feedback condition but significant
differences between high and low PSI scorers in the no-feedback condition.
Sarmány and Sládeková (1990) concluded that the problem-solving situation
“without feedback is too complex and complicated to be able to elaborate an
efficient strategy of its solution” for the self-appraised ineffective problem
solvers (p. 102). They also reported a significant correlation (r = .46)
between the number of errors and higher avoidance scores on the Approach-
Avoidance factor.
Other studies guided by cognitive theories (e.g., attributional style, infor-
mation processing) provided more complex findings involving important
differences in behaviors, cognitions, and affective reactions. Baumgardner
et al. (1986) conducted two studies; Study 2 examined attributions to six
hypothetical problems and manipulated bogus success/failure feedback. The
results revealed that the perceived effective problem solvers attributed their
“successful” performance more to their ability and effort and their “failed”
performance less to ability and effort. Conversely, the perceived ineffective
problem solvers did not differ in attributing their success or failure to ability
and effort. Larson et al. (1995) and Larson and Sailors (1997) examined
teacher trainees’performance in handling classroom disruptions while deliv-
ering a 15-minute classroom presentation. The results revealed that the per-
ceived effective problem solvers did not respond more effectively to the dis-
ruptions than the perceived ineffective problem solvers. However, the latter
group reported more negative self-assessments, emotional arousal, intense
affect, self-focused as opposed to problem-focused statements, and debilitat-
ing cognitions than the perceived effective problem solvers. Larson and Sail-
ors (1997) also reported that the participants were randomly given either suc-
cess or failure bogus feedback and asked to rate their attributions for their
performance. The results confirmed the earlier findings of Baumgardner
et al. (1986), indicating that perceived ineffective problem solvers did not dif-
fer in their attributions when given success or failure feedback, whereas the
perceived effective problem solvers varied their attributions for the two con-
ditions. Moreover, the perceived ineffective problem solvers also attributed

more to task difficulty. A final study (Mayo & Tanaka-Matsumi, 1996) exam-
ined self-statements while participants responded to an interpersonal prob-
lem depicted on videotape. Although level of problem-solving appraisal was
unrelated to the total number of solutions generated or solution effectiveness
scores, perceived ineffective problem solvers again used more task-inhibiting
self-statements, more emotion-focused self-statements, and fewer problem-
focused self-statements. The perceived ineffective problem solvers also
tended to view the interpersonal problems as not within their power to
change.
The complexity of the type of laboratory task might explain some of these
discrepant results. On laboratory tasks involving simple procedures, like ana-
gram tasks, significant relationships were not found with problem-solving
appraisal (e.g., Heppner & Petersen, 1982). Conversely, with more complex
procedures and repeated trials, relationships with problem-solving appraisal
were found (Larson et al., 1995; Sarmány & Sládeková, 1990). Although this
area of research is inconclusive, future researchers might use laboratory tasks
that more closely approximate real-life personal problems with uncertainty
and sufficient complexity for repeated problem-solving trials (e.g., see
Dorner, 1983). The Larson et al. (1995) and Larson and Sailor (1997) studies
are noteworthy as they involved a simulated problem situation for teacher
trainees, with class disruptions three times during a 15-minute presentation.
These simulations and the exercise in the Mayo and Tanaka-Matsumi (1996)
study are closer than anagram tasks are to real-life problem solving. More
important, these studies allowed a more thorough assessment of outcomes
(which revealed no differences on behavioral effectiveness but important dif-
ferences on emotional arousal, self-focused statements, debilitating
cognitions, and negative feelings) and provided evidence for a complex
interplay between behavioral performance, cognitions, and affective
responses.
In sum, the research findings suggest a relationship between problem-
solving appraisal and responses to hypothetical problems across seven of
nine studies, especially when the problem situations more closely approxi-
mate the nature of real-life personal problems and involve repeated trials,
uncertainty, and emotional arousal. The Larson et al. (1995), Larson and
Sailors (1997), and Mayo and Tanaka-Matsumi (1996) studies underscore
the necessity to examine a range of outcomes—not only behavioral effective-
ness but also emotional arousal, cognitions, and feelings.
Reports of Coping Activities

Does problem-solving appraisal affect how one reports coping with
stressful life events? A great deal of research has been conducted on how peo-

ple report coping with stressful life problems (see Lazarus, 2000; Zeidner &
Endler, 1996). Although this line of research has focused on reports about
how participants believe they coped with stressful events, there is a consider-
able amount of research documenting that coping self-reports are related to
coping outcomes as well as several indices of psychological distress (see
Friedman, 1992; Snyder & Ford, 1987; Zeidner & Endler, 1996). A common
strategy in studying coping has been to assess a broad range of cognitive and
affective coping activities that a person might use in responding to stressful
life problems. Based on a cognitive transactional theory (Lazarus, 1966; Laz-
arus & Folkman, 1984), two major functions of coping are widely agreed on
(Endler & Parker, 1990): (a) Problem-focused coping includes activities to
alter the cause of the distress or problem and (b) emotion-focused coping
includes activities to regulate stressful emotions associated with the distress
(Folkman, 1984; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984).
Consistent with a cognitive transactional theory of coping, 10 studies
using 13 separate samples examined associations between problem-solving
appraisal and problem- and emotional-focused coping. It was consistently
indicated that a positive problem-solving appraisal was associated with
reports of problem-focused coping or approaching and attempting to alter the
cause of the stressful problem (Corcoran, 1991; Heppner, Cook, et al., 1995;
Heppner, Cooper, et al., 2001; Heppner et al., 1983; Larson et al., 1990;
MacNair & Elliott, 1992; Neal, 1983; Reeder & Heppner, 1985; Ritchey,
Carscaddon, & Morgan, 1984; Sabourin et al., 1990). The findings support-
ing this conclusion are based on both dispositional and situation-specific
measures of coping, based on primarily White college student samples but
also U.S. racial/ethnic minorities (Reeder & Heppner, 1985) and Canadian
adults (Sabourin et al., 1990). MacNair and Elliott’s (1992) study used a pro-
spective design, which provides particularly strong empirical evidence.
Moreover, the Larson et al. (1990) study provides evidence of a strong rela-
tionship, based on simultaneous regressions, that problem-solving appraisal
was related to positive coping as well as a problem-solving self-efficacy fac-
tor across two samples. Conversely, three studies found no association
between problem-solving appraisal and emotion-focused coping (Corcoran,
1991; Heppner et al., 1983; Reeder & Heppner, 1985), weak associations
(Neal, 1983), or associations only with the Personal Control component
(e.g., Heppner, Cook, et al., 1995; MacNair & Elliott, 1992; Ritchey et al.,
1984; Sabourin et al., 1990). Overall, these findings suggest that the PSI is
more associated with problem-focused rather than emotion-focused coping.
Other studies provide additional information about relations between
problem-solving appraisal and expectations as well as attributions. In one of
the first attempts to explore relations between problem-solving appraisal and
coping, Heppner et al. (1982) conducted a structured interview with self-

appraised effective and ineffective problem solvers about how they cope with
stressful life problems. Their results suggested that the self-appraised effec-
tive problem solvers (a) are more motivated to solve their problems, (b)
expect themselves to be more successful, (c) attribute their successful efforts
to their ability and effort as opposed to luck, (d) persist longer in solving
problems, (e) delay gratification longer in struggling with problems, and (f)
infrequently hope a problem would just disappear. Baumgardner et al. (1986)
found much stronger evidence regarding attributional styles. In Study 1, the
participants were asked to assess their attributions for common psychologi-
cal and social problems. The study found that a distinguishing feature
between the self-appraised effective and ineffective problem solvers was the
causal role of effort. Self-appraised effective problem solvers saw effort (or
lack of it) as a major cause of their personal problems as well as their failure
to solve a laboratory problem. This suggests that perceived effective problem
solvers tend to assume personal responsibility for personal problems. Their
attributing failed coping attempts to inadequate effort underscores that they
believe that effort is the means by which problems can be overcome. Such
patterns in attributional style are consistent with a problem-solving style that
approaches rather than avoids personal problems.
Four studies suggest that two components of problem-solving appraisal,
Problem-Solving Confidence and Approach-Avoidance Style, may be the
strongest contributors to problem-focused coping reports, while a third com-
ponent, a lack of Personal Control, is associated with reports of disengaging,
denial, and emotion-focused coping (Heppner, Cook, et al., 1995; MacNair
& Elliott, 1992; Ritchey et al., 1984; Sabourin et al., 1990). For example,
higher levels of problem-solving confidence and a tendency to approach
problems were associated with reports of positive or engagement coping;
conversely, a lack of Personal Control and problem-solving confidence was
associated with more reports of disengagement coping activities (Ritchey
et al., 1984). Likewise, less personal control was associated with more resig-
nation for both men and women, and more emotional discharge and higher
levels of suppression and reactivity were associated with women in dis-
tressed marital relationships (Heppner, Cook, et al., 1995; Sabourin et al.,
1990).
In sum, consistent with Folkman and Lazarus’s cognitive transactional
theory of coping, there is a well-established association across 10 studies
between a positive problem-solving appraisal and problem-focused coping,
or approaching and attempting to alter the cause of a stressful problem. This
finding appears to be robust across different measures of coping, concurrent
and prospective designs, linear and cluster analytic procedures, and different
U. S. populations, and in one international sample. Two additional studies
suggest underlying mechanisms influencing the coping process; the

Baumgardner et al. (1986) study in particular underscores the role of effort

attributions for both the cause of personal problems and failed coping
attempts. Moreover, Problem-Solving Confidence and Approach-Avoidance
Style seem to be the strongest contributors to problem-focused coping
reports, whereas the Personal Control component in particular was associ-
ated with reports of disengaging, denial, and emotion-focused coping across
four studies.
Help Seeking and Utilizing Helping Resources

The judicious use of resources in one’s environment may help one cope
with stressful events. It makes intuitive sense that effective problem solvers
would be aware of their environment and efficiently use appropriate
resources. In contrast, an ineffective problem solver who tends to avoid try-
ing to directly solve a problem would be expected to make less use of helping
resources. This section reviews studies that have attempted to identify the
relationship between problem-solving appraisal and relevant variables asso-
ciated with utilizing helping resources, such as people’s knowledge of avail-
able helping resources, their frequency of contact with these services, effec-
tive utilization of formal assistance, and satisfaction with the outcome of
these services. Such relationships have been examined within the context of
problem-solving training interventions, career-planning services, counsel-
ing services, medical services, overall campus resources, help seeking, and
diverse types of institutionalized social support. The research has been
divided into the following three sections: (a) help seeking from university
resources, (b) utilizing social support and social/political resources, and (c)
benefiting from applied interventions such as problem-solving training and
counseling.
Help seeking from university resources. Using primarily self-efficacy and

career theories, studies have examined the relations between problem-
solving appraisal and students seeking help from various university
resources (Heppner & Krieshok, 1983; Neal & Heppner, 1986; Tracey et al.,
1986). The results from all three studies suggest that a positive problem-solv-
ing appraisal seems to be related to aspects of help seeking with college stu-
dents, namely awareness, use of, and satisfaction with campus resources.
The evidence reported earlier in this article suggested that self-appraised
ineffective problem solvers tended to experience more psychological dis-
tress; the three help-seeking studies also suggest that the perceived ineffec-
tive problem solvers tend to be unaware of helping resources, use them less
frequently, and are less satisfied with resources or training opportunities.
Problem-solving appraisal, however, was not related to students’ seeking

help from physicians and psychologists (Neal & Heppner, 1986; Tracey
et al., 1986), which suggests that there may be different patterns of help seek-
ing across different resources. Parenthetically, Heppner (1987) found that
students who made use of counseling services formed a bimodal distribution
of problem-solving appraisal scores, which suggests complex and perhaps
nonlinear relations in seeking help from counseling services.
In sum, three studies primarily using self-efficacy and career theories con-
sistently found that a more positive problem-solving appraisal was associ-
ated with help seeking in terms of being more aware of campus resources,
using them more often, and reporting greater satisfaction with such
resources. Conversely, problem-solving appraisal was not related to students
seeking help from physicians or psychologists, which may suggest different
patterns of help seeking across different resources. These studies focused on
predominately White college students in the Midwest, and the findings may
not generalize to minority populations.
Utilizing social support and social/political resources. A number of stud-

ies indicate that social support can provide a buffer against stress through
emotional support, guidance, and instrumental support (Roos & Cohen,
1987) and that a negative problem-solving appraisal was related to self-
report ratings of lower levels of social support (Elliott et al., 1991, 1992;
Wang et al., 1997; Wright & Heppner, 1991). Moreover, there is some evi-
dence that people with a negative problem-solving appraisal tend to view
their significant others more negatively (Larson et al., 1993); this study raises
questions about the perceived and actual social networks of the perceived
effective and ineffective problem solvers. In short, at least five studies have
linked problem-solving appraisal and social support such that a positive
problem-solving appraisal is associated with higher self-report ratings of
social support, as well as friends who tend to have a positive problem-solving
appraisal.
Another study also suggests that at least with spinal cord–injured adults,
there was an important interaction between problem-solving appraisal and
types of social support in predicting psychosocial impairment. Elliott et al.
(1992) found that self-appraised effective problem solvers were able to
derive more benefit from material resources provided by family, and self-
appraised ineffective problem solvers seemed to benefit from professional
advice and direction. This study suggests that for spinal cord–injured adults
there may be complex relations between problem-solving appraisal and
types of social support. Thus, not only may there be differences in levels of
social support across levels of problem-solving appraisal, but the interaction
of these two resources may affect coping and psychological adjustment.

An unpublished study (Tommasi, 2000) used an ecological model to

examine a new criterion, social and political resources (e.g., personal and
public money, state representatives, voting rights, human services, etc.). The
motivation and capacity to use social and political resources for adaptational
outcomes was termed sociopolitical control. Consistent with the theory,
problem-solving appraisal was associated with reports of sociopolitical con-
trol as well as behavioral reports of voluntary participation in organizations
or causes during the past year. Moreover, problem-solving appraisal (particu-
larly Problem-Solving Confidence) moderated sociopolitical control in pre-
dicting behavioral reports of participation.
In sum, a positive problem-solving appraisal was found to be related to
reports of higher levels of social support across four studies, associated with
having friends with more positive problem-solving appraisals in another
study, and associated with a broader motivation and capacity to use social/
political resources for adaptational outcomes in another study. In these stud-
ies, problem-solving appraisal appears to be linked to self-report ratings of
social support as well as social resources.
Benefiting from applied interventions. Problem-solving training has been

regarded as a promising therapeutic intervention (e.g., D’Zurilla, 1986;
Heppner & Hillerbrand, 1991). Using social problem solving as well as
cognitive-behavioral theories, researchers have consistently found that problem-
solving training has resulted in positive changes in problem-solving
appraisal (Grant, 1999; Heppner et al., 1988; Heppner & Petersen, 1982;
Nezu, 1986a; Nezu & Perri, 1989). The Nezu (1986a) investigation found
that problem-solving training resulted in a substantial increase in problem-
solving appraisal along with decreases in depressive symptoms. Grant
(1999) found that telephone interventions improved the problem-solving
appraisal of family caregivers of stroke survivors but only during the inter-
vention period. Another study (Pretorius, Heyns, & Broekmann, 1991) did
not find that a short intervention (DISCOVER) resulted in significant PSI
changes, probably because of the brief nature of the intervention. Other stud-
ies indicate that traditional individual psychotherapy (Heppner, Cooper,
et al., 2001), career counseling (M. J. Heppner et al., in press), a drug thera-
peutic treatment community (Goldapple & Montgomery, 1993), and com-
pleting a motivational course (Chynoweth, Blankinship, & Parker, 1986)
also resulted in positive changes in problem-solving appraisal. In short, nine
studies have found that a range of psychological interventions, from a gen-
eral motivational course to specific problem-solving training, has resulted in
positive changes in problem-solving appraisal.
Researchers have found that participants’ initial level of problem-solving
appraisal differentially affected outcomes of problem-solving training inter-

ventions. Four studies found that more positive levels of problem-solving

appraisal were related to more positive outcomes from problem-solving
training interventions and counseling (M. J. Heppner et al., in press; Heppner
et al., 1988; Heppner, Cooper, et al., 2001; Heppner & Reeder, 1984).
Heppner and Reeder (1984) examined the role of problem-solving appraisal
and its relationship to the perceived usefulness of a brief (1½ hour) problem-
solving training intervention for resident hall assistants (RAs), their supervi-
sors, and residence hall coordinators (HCs). RAs who perceived themselves
as more effective (as opposed to ineffective) problem solvers rated the train-
ing more useful 4 months later, saying it increased their awareness of their
own problem-solving processes and sensitized them to residents’ problem-
solving styles. The brief training in problem solving seemed to be most use-
ful 4 months later for RAs who had a tendency to approach problems. The
brief training in problem solving for HCs, which included concrete informa-
tion—that is, a PSI score—for the RAs whom they supervised, was most
beneficial for HCs who reported less problem-solving confidence.
Heppner et al. (1988) examined the role of problem-solving appraisal and
the change process during 8 weeks of problem-solving training. After the
training, the self-appraised ineffective (as opposed to effective) problem
solvers showed a greater change in problem-solving appraisal (especially
problem-solving confidence) and in a specific measure of problem-solving
self-efficacy. (Those findings could be related to a floor effect for the per-
ceived effective problem solvers.) The self-appraised effective (as opposed
to ineffective) problem solvers evaluated the course more highly. In addition,
using a thought-listing procedure after each session, Heppner et al. (1988)
found that self-appraised effective (as opposed to ineffective) problem solv-
ers had more positive thoughts during the training process in general, more
positive thoughts about others and the class, and more neutral thoughts about
problems and problem solving. Moreover, the differences in thought produc-
tion increased during training. These findings supported the elaboration like-
lihood model (ELM) (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986), which predicts that as per-
ceived relevance and the generation of positive, issue-relevant thoughts
increase, so does the effect of the message or intervention and its relation to
actual behavior.
Likewise, Heppner, Cooper, et al. (2001) found that more positive levels
of problem-solving appraisal were related to higher levels of problem-
solving strategies and self-efficacy in coping with clients’ presenting prob-
lem at intake as well as more resolution of the presenting problem at the end
of counseling and at 1 and 4 months after counseling. Similarly, M. J.
Heppner et al. (in press) found more positive levels of problem-solving were
associated with a more positive working alliance during counseling as well as
more positive career and psychological adjustment outcomes at the end of

counseling (M. J. Heppner et al., in press). Moreover, the more clients

improved their problem-solving appraisal during the course of counseling,
the more positive were the career and psychological adjustment outcomes.
Effective use of medical information and resources through self-
management and adherence to medical regimes often helps prevent common
medical complications. It seems plausible that effective problem solvers
would be more likely to adhere to self-care regimens and prevent the occur-
rence of secondary complications. Two studies previously mentioned
(Godshall & Elliott, 1997; Herrick et al., 1994) suggest that a tendency to
approach problems was associated with effective self-management through
the use of medical resources and information. These studies also provide evi-
dence that a positive problem-solving appraisal (especially a tendency to
approach problems) was associated with more effective coping through the
use of medical resources.
In sum, six studies suggest that problem-solving appraisal is associated
with differential outcomes from problem-solving training interventions,
counseling, and medical interventions. In all studies, a more positive initial
problem-solving appraisal of participants was predictive of more positive
training and better counseling outcomes, and those clients who improved
their problem-solving appraisal the most during the course of counseling
reported better counseling outcomes. Although participants with a more
negative problem-solving appraisal reported the greatest gains in problem-
solving appraisal in a problem solving intervention, those with a more posi-
tive appraisal reported cognitive processes consistent with more attitudinal
change as predicted by the ELM (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). Thus, the
Heppner et al. (1988) study suggests important differences in cognitive pro-
cesses of perceived effective and ineffective problem solvers during the
course of problem-solving training.
The research findings indicate that a positive problem-solving appraisal
was related to (a) help seeking in terms of awareness of, use of, and satisfac-
tion with campus student resources across three studies; (b) higher levels of
social support, including more friends with a more positive problem-solving
appraisal, and use of social/political resources across six studies; and (c)
greater satisfaction and better therapeutic outcomes from applied interven-
tions (e.g., problem-solving training, counseling, and medical interventions)
across six studies. In essence, 14 separate investigations indicate that
problem-solving appraisal is related to the awareness, utilization, and benefi-
cial outcomes when engaging in a very wide range of coping resources.
These results are found across a broad range of measures, both concurrent
and prospective designs, which include self-reports and others’ reports as
well as behavioral outcomes, and across primarily White college students
and adults. In addition, two studies examining physical health outcomes sug-

gest that the relation between problem-solving appraisal and the utilization
of medical resources results in important differences in behavioral outcomes,
such as behavioral medical outcomes. The Heppner et al. (1988) study pro-
vides additional evidence that there may be important differences in the cog-
nitive processes of perceived effective and ineffective problem solvers,
which suggests that cognitive processes may be very useful target interven-
tions for perceived ineffective problem solvers. Although some of the 14
studies discussed in this section were guided by specific theories, for the
most part, research was guided by past research.
EDUCATIONAL AND VOCATIONAL ISSUES
This section reviews the research that has examined problem-solving

appraisal with educational and vocational variables. Campbell (1960) main-
tained that an important method of establishing construct validity for a new
instrument is to demonstrate that it is not simply another form of an intelli-
gence test. Because problem-solving ability has historically been associated
with the assessment of intelligence (Rowe, 1985; Sternberg, 1982; Wechsler,
1958), Campbell’s suggestion is particularly important. Thus, the first part of
this section reviews the research related to intelligence as well as academic
aptitude and performance, educational level, and age. The second part of this
section summarizes the literature on the role of problem-solving appraisal
with career planning and decision making. Horan (1979) observed that there
is considerable overlap between problem-solving and decision-making theo-
ries, which suggests that there might be a link between those two constructs.
Intelligence, Academic Ability, Academic Performance,

Educational Level, and Age
Several studies suggest that problem-solving appraisal is not strongly

related (rs = –.31 to .15) to measures of intelligence and academic aptitude
(e.g., DeClue, 1983; Heppner & Petersen, 1982; Neal, 1983; Rudd et al.,
1996). These findings are based on associations with the WAIS-R, Shipley
Institute of Living Scale, Scholastic Aptitude Test, Missouri College English
Test, Missouri Mathematics Placement Test, and high school rank.
Other studies have examined relations between problem-solving
appraisal and test anxiety as well as academic performance. One study found
that higher levels of test anxiety were related to decreased Problem-Solving
Confidence and Personal Control (Blankstein, Flett, & Batten, 1989); similar
relationships were found between higher levels of trait and state test anxiety,
test-irrelevant thinking scores, and a lack of both confidence and personal

control over academic problems (Blankstein, Flett, & Watson, 1992). More-
over, when both the PSI and the Ways of Coping Scale (Folkman, Lazarus,
Dunkel-Schetter, Delongis, & Gruen, 1986) were used to predict trait and
state test anxiety, higher PSI avoidant scores added approximately 20% and
8% of unique variance in trait and state test anxiety, respectively. A third
study (Elliott, Godshall, Shrout, & Witty, 1990) of an academically at-risk
group found that problem-solving appraisal seems to be related to study
skills and habits that are important to functioning effectively in an academic
environment and, most important, to an important academic outcome, such
as course grades. Thus, self-appraised effective problem solving (and partic-
ularly Problem-Solving Confidence) was significantly associated with adap-
tive study habits and effective attitudes toward studying, as well as higher
semester grade point averages (the latter of which might also be considered a
behavioral outcome measure of coping). Likewise, Blankstein et al. (1992)
found that more positive appraisals of both Problem-Solving Confidence and
Personal Control were related to better academic grades.
The PSI has been found to have some associations with educational level
(e.g., Felton, Parsons, Bartoces, 1997; Neal, 1983); those with higher educa-
tional levels indicated a more positive problem-solving appraisal (Neal,
1983). Moreover, when levels of education were controlled across age
groups, older adults (M = 70 years) tended to score more positively on the PSI
total as well as the Problem-Solving Confidence factor (Haught, Hill, Nardi,
& Walls, 2000). When only groups with higher levels of education were
examined (college students and faculty), older adults tended to score more
positively on the PSI (r = –.34; Wright, Carscaddon, & Lambert, 2000).
In sum, nine separate investigations indicate that problem-solving
appraisal was not found to be significantly related to measures of intelligence
and academic aptitude but is related to test anxiety, education level, and age.
In essence, four studies suggest that problem-solving appraisal is not another
measure of intelligence. Three studies found problem-solving appraisal to be
related to test anxiety as well as study skills for at-risk students, which sug-
gests that problem-solving appraisal may be an important construct for aca-
demic interventions with some students. Moreover, two studies suggest that
problem-solving appraisal is related to educational level, and two other stud-
ies also found relations with age of the participants.
Career Planning and Decision Making
It has been suggested that a person’s career decision–making processes

are related to and could be considered instances of problem solving (Holland
& Holland 1977) and contribute to models of career maturity (e.g., Crites,
1978). Such a conceptualization would suggest that problem-solving

appraisal should be related to career planning and decision-making pro-

cesses. Thirteen studies have examined relations between problem-solving
appraisal, career planning, career maturity, decision making, and occupa-
tional burnout (Chartrand, Rose, Elliott, Marmarosh, & Caldwell, 1993;
Elliott, Shewchuk, Hagglund, Rybarczyk, & Harkins, 1996; Henry, 1996,
1999; M. J. Heppner et al., in press; Heppner, Cook, Strozier, & Heppner,
1991; Jarwan, 1985; Larson & Heppner, 1985; Larson, Heppner, Ham, &
Dugan, 1988; Larson, Toulouse, Ngumba, Fitzpatrick, & Heppner, 1994;
McCraken & Weitzman, 1997; M. J. Miller, Karriker, & Pilgreen, 1984;
Phillips, Pazienza, & Ferrin, 1984); the results of these studies support sev-
eral vocational theories as well as Holland and Holland’s (1977) contention
that career decision making is related to problem-solving appraisal.
Based on vocational theories (particularly career maturity models), sev-
eral studies confirmed that problem-solving appraisal is related in expected
ways to (a) vocational identity and career indecision and stress (Heppner
et al., 1991; Henry, 1996, 1999; Jarwan, 1985; Larson et al., 1994; Larson &
Heppner, 1985); (b) career decision making, such as rational decision-mak-
ing strategies associated with approaching problems (Chartrand et al., 1993;
M. J. Heppner et al., in press; Phillips et al., 1984); (c) high levels of knowl-
edge and certainty in planning multiple career roles in women (McCracken &
Weitzman, 1997); (d) differentiating among some types of career-undecided
students (Larson et al., 1988); and (e) personality consistency (M. J. Miller
et al., 1984) in ways predicted by Holland’s theory (1973). Using the social
problem-solving model, D’Zurilla (1986) and Elliott, Shewchuk, Hagglund,
et al. (1996) also found that Problem-Solving Confidence was a significant
predictor of lower burnout scores of nurses in rehabilitation settings.
The two studies that examined career decision making have important
implications for extending career theories. Phillips et al. (1984) examined the
processes underlying problem solving and career decision making and found
that (a) individuals who employ rational decision-making strategies are
likely to approach problems, (b) individuals who endorse dependent deci-
sional strategies are likely to approach problems but lack problem-solving
confidence, and (c) individuals who endorse both rational and intuitive
decision-making strategies have problem-solving confidence but lack per-
sonal control. Another study examined the relationship between problem-
solving appraisal and career decision making through path analyses.
Chartrand et al. (1993) found that a tendency to approach problems was
related to rational decision making, which is consistent with the Phillips et al.
(1984) study. They also found that a lack of personal control was related to a
need for more information when faced with a career decision. Moreover, they
found support for more complex relations, namely, that Problem-Solving

Confidence and Personal Control tended to serve as mediators between some

of the personality variables (especially neuroticism) and the antecedents of
career indecision. These results suggest that the relations between problem-
solving appraisal and some indices of career decision making are more com-
plex than previously conceptualized.
Several other studies contribute unique findings that provide additional
information to the literature on career planning. Holland (1973) hypothe-
sized that individuals with consistent personality patterns tend to be more
predictable, productive, stable, and satisfied with their occupations than indi-
viduals who have inconsistent personality patterns. The results of the M. J.
Miller et al. study supported Holland’s theory:—that is, the higher the degree
of personality consistency, the more students perceived themselves as effec-
tive problem solvers (M. J. Miller et al., 1984). The study by McCracken and
Weitzman (1997) suggests that more positive levels of problem-solving
appraisal not only were related to higher levels of career knowledge but also
were associated with planning multiple and complicated career roles; thus,
problem-solving appraisal seems to be especially relevant for women dealing
with multiple roles and challenges. The Henry (1996, 1999) studies used pre-
dominantly racial/ethnic minority applicants to medical school, thereby
enhancing the generalizability of the findings. The Jarwan (1985) study was
conducted with secondary public school students in Jordan and offers
additional evidence of the generalizability of the findings to other cultures.
In sum, 13 studies suggest that problem-solving appraisal is related to
how a person engages in a specific problem, in career planning, and in deci-
sion making and supports various vocational development theories, espe-
cially career maturity models. Moreover, the results suggest that problem-
solving appraisal is related to a wide range of career variables, such as career
indecision, career decision–making style, career distress, career knowledge,
and planning career roles.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
We will now synthesize the major findings and themes from this review
and draw the conclusion that in general, problem-solving appraisal is related
to problem-solving effectiveness, with some exceptions. Evidence will be
compiled regarding relationships between problem-solving appraisal and (a)
psychological, educational, and vocational adjustment and physical health;
(b) coping; (c) behavioral observations and outcomes; and (d) cognitive and
affective processes.

Psychological/Educational/Vocational
Adjustment and Physical Health
This review of 79 separate investigations clearly indicates that problem-

solving appraisal as measured by the PSI is associated with a very broad array
of psychological adjustment indices from global distress measures, such as
the MMPI, to more focused measures of anxiety, depression, and hopeless-
ness, to very specific indices of psychological adjustment, such as eating dis-
orders. In essence, the more positive a person’s problem-solving appraisal,
the more he or she tends to report (a) positive self-concepts, (b) higher levels
of self-efficacy/assertiveness/personal agency, and (c) low levels of social
uneasiness, worry, depression, anxiety, hopelessness, suicidal ideation, and
irrational beliefs. There was especially strong evidence indicating robust
relationships between problem-solving appraisal and depression (35 stud-
ies), anxiety and/or worry (12 studies), and hopelessness and suicidal
ideation (12 studies). Moreover, there was strong evidence that problem-
solving appraisal plays a moderating role as it interacts with other variables
to predict psychological adjustment; for example, when perceived effective
problem solvers experience considerable stress, they did not become
depressed as did the perceived ineffective problem solvers. The cumulative
effects of the PSI, stress, and the moderation effect typically accounted for
40% to 87% of the variance in depression scores, thus indicating a great deal
of predictive utility.
These findings have supported the role of problem solving (specifically
problem-solving appraisal) in a broad range of theories of psychological
adjustment, from early theories that postulated that ineffective problem solv-
ing leads to psychological maladjustment in general (e.g., Spivack & Shure,
1974) to more specific adjustment theories, such as the social problem-solving
theory of depression (Nezu & Ronan, 1985), the diathesis-stress-
hopelessness model of suicidal behavior (Schotte & Clum, 1987), cognitive
anxiety theories (Barlow, 2000), multifactoral models of eating disorders
(Striegel-Moore et al., 1986), gender issues in coping (E. P. Cook, 1990), and
theories of trauma (Resick, 2001). The association between problem-solving
appraisal and psychological health has been found with a broad range of
assessment instruments in primarily White U.S. participants and those of six
other cultures (Canada, China, England, Italy, South Africa, and Turkey).
Participants’ ages ranged from adolescent to elderly in clinical and
nonclinical samples.
The results of 13 separate studies suggested that the PSI was related to a
number of physical health indices; most of these studies were guided by the
social problem-solving theory (D’Zurilla, 1986; D’Zurilla & Nezu, 1999).
The perceived effective (as opposed to ineffective) problem solvers reported

more positive health expectancies, fewer health complaints, lower levels of

chronic pain, and fewer health problems. In addition, a more positive
problem-solving appraisal (notably, a tendency to approach problems) was
predictive of better objective behavioral health outcomes, such as fewer
decubitus ulcers. Another group of studies found that the PSI was able to dif-
ferentiate patients with traumatic brain injuries from noninjured adults more
effectively than other problem-solving measures and was the best predictor
of community integration. The association between problem-solving
appraisal and physical health has been found with a broad range of assess-
ment instruments and behavioral outcomes in primarily White U.S. college
students and community adults. These studies provide evidence that the PSI
is predictive of both self-reports of health as well as behavioral health
indicators.
Twenty-two studies also provide information about associations with
educational and vocational issues. This review indicated (a) 4 studies did not
find a relationship between problem-solving appraisal and intelligence or
academic aptitude; (b) 3 studies found problem-solving appraisal associated
with test anxiety, test irrelevant thinking, and study skills in at-risk students;
(c) 2 studies suggested that problem-solving appraisal was related to educa-
tional level, and 2 studies found relations with age; and (d) 13 studies found
problem-solving appraisal was related to a wide range of career-planning and
decision-making variables. Perceived effective problem solvers reported less
test anxiety, better study skills and habits, and, consistent with vocational
theory, higher levels of vocational identity, lower levels of career indecision
and stress, more rational career decision–making styles, and higher levels of
knowledge and certainty in planning multiple career roles. Thus, problem-
solving appraisal was related to how one engages in a specific problem, such
as career decision making. The associations are found across a wide range of
assessment instruments in primarily White U.S. samples but have also been
found in U.S. racial/ethnic minorities and in one international sample (Jor-
dan). The participants included college students, community adults, and
older adults, who varied in terms of career decision from decided to unde-
cided. In short, the research suggests a strong and consistent association
between problem-solving appraisal and both career planning and decision
making.
Coping
Results from at least 32 separate investigations indicate that problem-

solving appraisal is related to a wide range of coping activities. Results from
(a) 7 of 9 studies suggest that problem-solving appraisal is related to hypo-
thetical and laboratory problem solving (particularly when the problem situ-

ation more closely approximates actual problem-solving demands); (b) 12

studies linked problem-solving appraisal to coping activities in ways consis-
tent with the Lazarus cognitive transactional theory of coping, particularly
problem-focused coping (and to some extent emotion-focused coping); and
(c) 14 studies indicated that problem-solving appraisal is related to the
awareness, use of, and outcomes from using a very wide range of coping
resources. The research suggested that perceived effective problem solvers
(a) tended to use higher levels of problem-focused coping to manage or alter
stressful events; (b) tended to be more aware of, use, and be more satisfied
with campus student resources; (c) reported having higher levels of social
support; (d) reported having friends with a more positive problem-solving
appraisal; and (e) reported greater satisfaction and better therapeutic out-
comes from applied interventions such as counseling. The results provide
strong evidence for a robust relationship across problem-solving appraisal
and coping activities in theoretically consistent ways. This relationship is
found across a very wide range of verbal report assessments, across different
designs (e.g., true experimental designs, qualitative, concurrent,
prospective), across different U.S. college student and community adult
populations, and with one international sample.
Behavioral Observations and Outcomes

When behavioral patterns were examined, the self-perceived effective (as
opposed to ineffective) problem solvers also tended to behave in ways reflec-
tive of effective problem solvers (note important exceptions in the Problem-
Solving Effectiveness section). For example, (a) external observers blind to
the participants’ PSI scores and based on relatively short interviews (i.e., 1
hour) rated self-appraised effective problem solvers as being more aware of
the problem-solving process and more insightful (Heppner et al., 1982) and
having more effective problem-solving skills (Heppner et al., 1982; Larson,
1984); (b) problem-solving appraisal (notably on the Approach-Avoidance
Style scale) was predictive of objective behavioral health outcomes (e.g., uri-
nary tract infections; Godshall & Elliott, 1997; Herrick et al., 1994), and (c)
mothers’ positive problem-solving appraisal (especially their Personal Con-
trol scores) was predictive of independent ratings of higher levels of social
competence and fewer behavioral problems in their preschool children.
Moreover, several studies indirectly suggest behavioral differences
between the perceived effective and ineffective problem solvers through
well-established psychological assessment strategies and other psycho-
logical measures: (a) Two external judges analyzed MMPI profiles of self-
perceived effective and ineffective problem solvers and rated the former as
more effective problem solvers (Heppner & Anderson, 1985), (b) the PSI

outperformed standard neuropsychological problem-solving measures in

differentially identifying traumatic brain-injured patients from controls
(Rath et al., 2000; Rath, Langenbahn, et al., in press) and in predicting the
most widely used measure of community integration (Rath, et al., 2003), and
(c) across 10 studies (e.g., Larson et al., 1990; MacNair & Elliott, 1992), the
PSI has been strongly associated with problem-focused coping, which has
been documented to relate to coping outcomes and psychological adjustment
(Zeidner & Endler, 1996). The picture that emerges in objective ratings by
both external observers and through psychological assessments is that the
perceived effective problem solvers are, in fact, more effective problem solv-
ers, have better objective health outcomes, and have children with higher lev-
els of social competence.
Cognitive and Affective Processes
When cognitive processes were examined, data from a wide range of stud-
ies indicated that the self-perceived effective (as opposed to ineffective)
problem solvers reported cognitions theoretically consistent with effective
problem solving. For example, self-perceived effective problem solvers (a)
reported fewer irrational beliefs and dysfunctional thoughts (Heppner et al.,
1983); (b) attributed successful problem-solving performances to ability and
effort (Baumgardner et al., 1986; Larson & Sailors, 1997), attributed the
cause of their personal problems to a lack of effort (Baumgardner et al.,
1986), and viewed the solution as being more in their power to change (Mayo
& Tanaka-Matsumi, 1996), all of which increases the likelihood of persis-
tence in problem solving (Heppner & Krauskopf, 1987); (c) reported fewer
negative self-statements and debilitating cognitions (Larson et al., 1995) and
fewer task-inhibiting self-statements during difficult interpersonal encoun-
ters (Mayo & Tanaka-Matsumi, 1996); (d) reported that they are more moti-
vated to solve problems, persist longer, and delay gratification longer in
struggling with problems (Heppner et al., 1982); (e) expected themselves to
be successful in problem solving (Heppner et al., 1982) and were more likely
to try difficult anagram tasks after poor performances (Moss, 1983); (f) gen-
erated more positive thoughts in general during a problem-solving training
course and specifically more positive thoughts about the class (Heppner
et al., 1988); (g) reported less test-irrelevant thinking in academic exams
(Blankstein et al., 1992); and (h) reported using more rational career
decision-making strategies (Phillips et al., 1984). The constellation of cogni-
tive processes reported by the perceived effective problem solvers suggests a
functional or adaptive problem-solving style. These motivational and
attributional patterns are associated with an increased likelihood of persis-
tence in problem solving (Heppner & Krauskopf, 1987) as well as problem-

focused coping associated with resolving problems (see Lazarus & Folkman,
1984), along with fewer negative and debilitating cognitions that typically
detract from task-relevant behavior.
Likewise, when affective processes are examined, data indicated the fol-
lowing composite. Self-perceived ineffective problem solvers reported (a)
more frequently hoping a problem would just disappear (Heppner et al.,
1982), (b) more emotional discharge for women in distressed marital rela-
tionships (Sabourin et al., 1990), (c) more emotion-focused coping attempts
(notably when participants lacked Personal Control; e.g., MacNair & Elliott,
1992), (d) more emotional arousal and intense affect (Larson et al., 1995) and
more emotion-focused self-statements (Mayo & Tanaka-Matsumi, 1996) in
difficult interpersonal encounters, and (e) more emotional problems that they
could not handle without help (Heppner & Anderson, 1985). In sum, after
more than 20 years of research and more than 120 empirical studies, there is
now very strong support for the explanatory and predictive utility of the con-
struct of problem-solving appraisal. As a whole, the constellation of evi-
dence from the accumulated research can be interpreted as suggesting that
perceived effective problem solvers have better psychological and physical
health, better coping effectiveness, and better vocational adjustment in gen-
eral. This pattern of findings is found across a very wide range of adjustment
indices, cognitive and affective processes, behavioral observations or mea-
sures, research designs (e.g., between groups, cross-sectional, prospective,
longitudinal, qualitatively oriented process analyses), and at least nine differ-
ent cultures. In addition, problem-solving appraisal has been a useful con-
struct to explain a wide range of theoretical predictions and hypotheses of
human behavior. Moreover, these findings cannot be easily explained as
being the result of self-report biases, such as social desirability or negative
affectivity. In short, the picture that emerges is that the perceived effective
problem solvers appear to be more effective problem solvers in ways that
have been predicted by a wide range of theories.
Problem-Solving Effectiveness
Given the compilation of findings, it is appealing to conceptualize

problem-solving appraisal as indicative of “effective problem solving,”
“problem solving ability,” or “problem-solving skill.” However, as Nezu
et al. (1989) aptly noted, “ positive self-appraisal…cannot produce effective
problem solving performance, unless the person also has the particular prob-
lem solving abilities needed to resolve the problematic situation” (page 41).
In many instances, problem-solving appraisal may overlap with actual
problem-solving effectiveness or problem-solving skill. In these cases, based

on countless problem-solving trials, a person’s problem-solving appraisal

may indeed reflect and be consistent with his or her actual problem-solving
skills. In such cases, the PSI may be substantially correlated with problem-
solving skill. However, there are instances when a person’s problem-solving
appraisal may not match his or her problem-solving performances. Some-
times people can be overconfident and their performance will not match their
initial appraisal. Likewise, people can feel that they are underachievers as
problem solvers (also see Kim, Atkinson, & Umemoto, 2001, for a discus-
sion of Asian cultural influences to be humble and to not overinflate one’s
self-evaluations) when their appraisal (e.g., confidence) is lower than their
problem-solving performances.
Sometimes a positive problem-solving appraisal does not reflect
problem-solving effectiveness. For example, Larson and Heppner (1989)
found that although a group of inpatient recovering alcoholics appraised
themselves more negatively on the PSI than nonclinical adults, some men
with poor psychological adjustment appraised themselves very positively on
the PSI. For example, the two lowest PSI scores were 44 and 54 (32 is the
lowest possible PSI score); in addition, they obtained scores of 18 and 19 on
the Approach-Avoidance Style factor (the lowest possible score is 16, and the
mean of the alcoholic sample was 46.2). These two men were quite
depressed, addicted to alcohol, and were not coping very well with their life
situations, yet they reported very high levels of problem-solving confidence
and the ability to strongly approach problems. Interviews with these men
revealed they were perseverating with their thoughts and, most likely,
overapproaching their problems.
Likewise, Corcoran (1991) found that four groups of men incarcerated in
a maximum-security prison all appraised themselves quite positively on the
PSI, more positively than any other clinical sample. The dysfunctional
behavioral patterns that resulted in incarceration in a maximum security
prison would suggest that these relatively lower PSI means might indicate a
more positive problem-solving appraisal than is warranted or that other vari-
ables are needed to explain the apparent incongruities. Moreover, Corcoran
(1991) found that when perceived effective problem solvers encountered
problems over which they had little control (e.g., a cellmate), they turned to
aggressive acts. Although in some cases physical aggression may be func-
tional within a maximum-security prison, this problem-solving strategy
often causes problems in other settings (which was reflected in numerous
crime reports for many of these individuals). Perhaps there may be complex
interactions between one’s problem-solving appraisal and personality char-
acteristics (e.g., sociopathic personality styles) that result in very different
problem-solving outcomes (see Heppner & Krauskopf, 1987).

A study by Larson et al. (1995) was one of the first to focus extensively on
the relations between problem-solving appraisal and problem-solving per-
formance. Larson et al. found that problem-solving appraisal did not relate to
problem-solving performance in responding to a disruptive student during a
15-minute lecture. Note, however, through interpersonal process recall
(Kagan, 1975) and thought listing (Cacioppo & Petty, 1981), findings indi-
cated that people with a negative problem-solving appraisal emitted more
negative statements, were more emotionally aroused, reported more intense
affect, had more self-focused statements, and reported more debilitating
cognitions and feelings during the task. A later study by Mayo and Tanaka-
Matsumi (1996) reported a similar pattern of results related to responding to
a difficult interpersonal problem.
Thus, the evidence suggests that problem-solving appraisal reflects
problem-solving performance or skill. However, there is evidence that a per-
son’s PSI score does not always reflect effective problem solving.
FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS
This article shows that research has created a broad knowledge base about
the PSI and identified a number of consistent patterns in the findings.
Although much more is now known from the PSI literature compared with 20
years ago, the existing findings also raise new questions and hypotheses. The
purpose of this section is to identify promising areas of inquiry that build on
and are likely to extend the PSI literature in significant ways. This section
focuses on identifying (a) topics that seem to be particularly worth examining
at this time and (b) general research strategies (rather than specific studies),
and it uses specific topics to illustrate the various strategies. The recommen-
dations for future research directions will be grouped into the following
seven subsections: Evidence of Problem-Solving Effectiveness, Examine
and Develop More Complex Models of Human Adjustment, Examine the
Utility of Problem-Solving Appraisal in Other Subgroups/Populations/
Cultures, Explore a Broader Array of Associations in Physical Health,
Examine the Utility of Enhancing Problem-Solving Appraisal in Remedial
and Preventive Interventions, Identify Determinants of Problem-Solving
Appraisal, and Further Explicate the Role of Problem-Solving Appraisal in
Coping. We hope that this section will (a) stimulate researchers to increase
the knowledge base of the PSI, (b) facilitate refinements in problem-solving
theory as well as other theories of human behavior, and (c) consequently,
enhance service delivery to clients by promoting the development of reme-
dial and preventive psychological interventions.

Evidence of Problem-Solving Effectiveness
The evidence from this review suggests that PSI scores reflect problem-
solving skill in many but not all instances. Additional research is needed to
further explicate the link between the PSI and problem-solving skill.
One strategy may be to conceptualize problem-solving effectiveness
explicitly as an interplay of behavioral, cognitive, and affective operations
aimed at resolving the problematic situation. Although behavioral perfor-
mance is an essential component of problem-solving effectiveness, it may
only reflect one dimension of that effectiveness. For example, the studies by
Mayo and Tanaka-Matsumi (1996) and Larson et al. (1995) revealed that
overt behavioral performances were not often consistent with covert cog-
nitions and affective reactions; the measurement of overt behavioral perfor-
mance did not tell the whole story. Thus, examining the interplay between
problem-solving performance and concurrent cognitive and affective opera-
tions may provide a more complete understanding of problem-solving
effectiveness. Future researchers might broaden the conceptualization of
problem-solving effectiveness beyond behavioral performance and use a
variety of techniques such as thought listing and Interpersonal Process Recall
to assess a broader range of problem-solving variables related to problem-
solving ness.
A second strategy may be to continue to use contrived laboratory settings
to intensively study applied problem-solving behavioral performance (and
associated cognitive/affective operations). It may be most useful to create
laboratory studies that closely simulate real-life applied problems (see
Heppner, Kivlighan, & Wampold, 1999, for a discussion of dimensions of
analogue designs), such as those developed by Larson et al. (1995) and Mayo
and Tanaka-Matsumi (1996). These studies revealed a lack of theoretically
expected differences in problem-solving behavioral performance but theo-
retically consistent negative and debilitating cognitions and emotional
arousal. It is unclear whether the analogue nature of both studies (e.g., 15
minutes of a class presentation) allowed an adequate sampling of behavioral
problem solving; little is known about behavioral problem solving and the
dynamic nature of problem solving over time (see Heppner & Krauskopf,
1987). It might be necessary to examine behavioral problem-solving perfor-
mances (and associated cognitive/affective operations) on multiple occa-
sions to obtain an accurate assessment of applied problem solving. Research
could examine repeated problem-solving performances over time and across
different personality styles because some personality characteristics may
moderate different types of problem-solving performances (see Heppner &
Krauskopf, 1987).

Another strategy may be to use qualitative designs to more intensively

examine relations between problem-solving appraisal as measured by the
PSI and problem-solving performance. A considerable amount of new infor-
mation might be added by intensively and repeatedly studying individuals
over time who have high and low PSI scores. Interviews might reveal impor-
tant differences between the two groups in certain problem-solving skills
including problem-definition skills, cognitions, or interpersonal-related
skills such as empathy. It may be equally important to examine individuals
whose PSI score seems to be incongruent with actual problem-solving per-
formance (such as individuals identified by Larson & Heppner, 1989, and
Corcoran, 1991).
By exploring the interplay among a broad range of cognitive, affective,
and behavioral processes associated with problem-solving skills, researchers
may be able to significantly expand the knowledge bases around the PSI and
its relationship with problem-solving effectiveness.
Examine and Develop More Complex Models of Human Adjustment
This review identified evidence linking problem-solving appraisal as

measured by the PSI to a broad range of psychological, physical health, and
vocational-adjustment indices. Although a wide range of research designs
were used in the existing PSI literature, many of the early studies in particular
examined zero-order relationships or simple between-group differences. In
topics where there are well-established relationships with the PSI (such as
general indices of social and psychological health, depression, anxiety, hope-
lessness, and suicidality) with particular populations (e.g., White college stu-
dents), it is no longer useful to examine research questions through simple
zero-order relationships. Similarly, almost all of the research examining
problem-solving appraisal and physical health with predominantly White
participants has examined linear relationships through analyses of variance,
correlations, and regressions (save Tracey et al., 1986). In developing stud-
ies, researchers are encouraged to consider the prevalence of the research
designs and the samples used in the previous research (see Heppner et al.,
1999, for discussion of the selection of research designs within an existing
knowledge base).
Research that focuses on very specific types of psychological adjustment
problems, such as eating disorders, as opposed to general indices of psycho-
logical adjustment may be more powerful in identifying specific links
between problem-solving appraisal and psychological health because of
more homogeneous sampling. Thus, research that examines specific psychi-
atric disorders (e.g., obsessive-compulsive disorders) or specific target prob-

lems (e.g., marital distress) may be particularly useful in clarifying the differ-
ential role of problem-solving appraisal across various indices of
psychological adjustment.
In areas where linear relationships are well established between the PSI
and other variables with particular populations, we recommend that
researchers examine more multifaceted models that include moderators,
mediators, and structural paths between problem-solving appraisal and indi-
ces of psychological and physical health as well as career adjustment. Such
lines of inquiry have a great deal of potential to identify more complex rela-
tions within applied problem solving, which will help researchers more
closely approximate the complexity people experience when grappling with
stressful life problems. We also encourage researchers to use longitudinal
designs that would allow stronger conclusions about casual relationships as a
result of problem-solving appraisal. In addition, we also encourage research-
ers to use more complex findings from one topic area to form hypotheses in
another topic. For example, given that problem-solving appraisal has served
to consistently moderate the relationship between stress and depression, this
paradigm might be useful to examine other areas, such as predicting physical
health outcomes like disease progression. Research that examines more mul-
tifaceted relations between problem-solving appraisal and various physical
and psychological health indices across different populations holds a great
deal of promise for identifying the multiple roles that problem-solving
appraisal plays in human adjustment, thereby extending theory and
enhancing practice interventions.
It may also be useful to examine the differential roles of the three PSI fac-
tors in more complex models of human adjustment. For example, this review
suggests that Personal Control and Approach-Avoidance Style may have dif-
ferent roles within physical health. In the career area, the study by Chartrand
et al. (1993) also found evidence for complex relations with the PSI factors,
namely, that Problem-Solving Confidence and Personal Control tended to
serve as mediators between some personality variables (especially
neuroticism) and the antecedents of career indecision. The results suggest
more complex mediating roles between personality variables and career
decision making. In addition, studies that examine interrelationships among
the problem-solving appraisal components, such as the Problem-Solving
Confidence Mediational Model of Psychological Adjustment (e.g., see
Heppner et al., 2002), suggest additional complexity among the PSI factors
and psychological adjustment. Examining more complex relations among
the PSI factors and indices of psychological well-being, physical health, and
vocational adjustment may help researchers understand more complex rela-
tions within problem-solving appraisal, which would be useful for both
theory and practice.

Finally, it might be useful to more fully develop models of human

adjustment by explicating not only the personal resource variables such as
problem-solving appraisal but also different types of environmental
demands. Heppner and Krauskopf’s (1987) work shows how problems can
differ on a number of characteristics (e.g., problem difficulty level, internally
or externally imposed causes, sudden vs. gradual onset). Of particular inter-
est may be problems that confront individuals occasionally, such as a career
problem, as distinct from societal problems arising from racism, sexism, and
classism. There is ample evidence that there are significant mental health
costs as a result of racism in the United States (Thompson & Neville, 1999).
In short, researchers might examine the role of problem-solving appraisal in
dealing with a wide range of problems. Such research might also examine
when it is adaptive to recognize the limits of one’s problem-solving
appraisal, especially what kind of problems are not readily resolved by indi-
viduals and when it is functional to join others in problem solving.
Examine the Utility of Problem-Solving Appraisal in

Other Subgroups/Populations/Cultures
Much of the research examining problem-solving appraisal has primarily
used predominantly White college students and adults. Although there is
some research with U.S. racial/ethnic minority groups and participants from
other countries, we recommend that researchers continue to examine the role
of problem-solving appraisal with non-White and cross-national participants
with all types of research designs and analyses. This recommendation holds
for all four of the content areas we covered: psychological and physical
health, vocational adjustment, and coping activities. For example, in the
Coping section there was no information about help-seeking activities across
various American racial/ethnic minority groups and within specific environ-
ments, such as primarily White institutions of higher education. Research
that extends the generalizability or external validity of the existing PSI litera-
ture to other populations would significantly extend the knowledge base and
limitations of the PSI and lead to a greater understanding of not only
problem-solving appraisal but applied problem solving across subgroups
within the United States.
It may also be useful to examine the various associations of problem-
solving appraisal across different cultures. For example, some researchers
(e.g., Weisz, Rothbaum & Blackburn, 1984) have suggested that some Asian
cultures, such as the Japanese culture, emphasize different types of control in
coping with stressful problems; examining the role of problem-solving
appraisal within different cultures could provide a great deal of new informa-
tion about the PSI and problem solving in general across cultures and thereby

inform theory development and practice. Cross-cultural research also may

help to identify additional dimensions of problem solving (e.g., collective
group problem solving) beyond those measured by the PSI that facilitate
greater understanding of problem solving and psychological adjustment
across cultures.
Almost all of the previous research has reported an absence of differences
between men and women participants. For example, although most studies of
coping did not find PSI differences by sex, a few studies found meaningful
differences (e.g., Sabourin et al., 1990). Similarly, although few PSI differ-
ences were found by sex in the career literature, one study (Heppner et al.,
1991) found different relations for men and women between problem-
solving appraisal and career variables. Ptacek, Smith, and Zanas (1992) con-
cluded that surprisingly little is known about sex differences across various
coping activities. Part of the problem may be that researchers have tended to
examine only differences in means between men and women, as opposed to
examining differences in the relations among the variables, and mean scores
and linear zero-order relationships may not tell the whole story. It may be
useful to not only consider biological sex but also examine gender-related
variables, such as gender role conflict (O’Neil, Helms, Gable, David, &
Wrightsman, 1986). Perhaps more complex research as well as qualitative
designs are needed to examine how biological sex and gender role socializa-
tion variables are intertwined with problem-solving appraisal.
The PSI literature may be greatly enriched by the additional focus on
generalizability to other subgroups, populations, and cultures. Moreover,
research has not examined the role of problem-solving appraisal within the
multiple intersections of race/ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, and socio-
economic status. For example, class level may greatly affect problem-solving
appraisal, given the different levels of financial and other resources available
to people confronting problems. Research across cultures may reveal impor-
tant individual differences in the role of problem-solving appraisal in human
adjustment and, consequently, enhance theory and practice.
Explore a Broad Array of Associations With Physical Health

Although some areas of psychological adjustment such as depression
have received a great deal of attention in the PSI literature, a number of other
areas have received considerably less, including eating disorders, parenting
style, and gender role conflict. For example, the established link between
problem-solving appraisal and physical health is encouraging, but it is
limited to 13 studies. The role of counseling psychologists within health
psychology has expanded (see Hoffman & Driscoll, 2000), and relating
problem-solving appraisal to physical health could promote the development

of health-related psychosocial interventions (e.g., see Grant et al., 1999, for

an excellent example of using problem-solving interventions with family
caregivers of stroke patients). There may be productive lines of inquiry to not
only continue examining relations between the PSI and physical health indi-
ces but also examine a broader range of physical health indices not previ-
ously investigated.
For example, research might examine the relationship between problem-
solving appraisal and outcome measures for diseases related to gastrointesti-
nal and cardiovascular problems and for cancer progression. A broad range
of health outcomes might also be explored, such as patient compliance with
medical regimen, disease management and cure, quality of life, medical
complications, extended hospitalizations, medication at discharge, and
relapse episodes as well as employment and legal issues related to medical
problems. There is also growing evidence that psychosocial factors including
problem solving are associated not with the disease occurrence but with dis-
ease progression in cancer patients (Meyer & Mark, 1995). Research might
examine the role of problem-solving appraisal in disease progression and
quality of life across different types of cancer patients. For example, a quali-
tative study revealed that problem solving was a central construct in how
breast cancer survivors managed symptoms related to lymphedema
(Heppner et al., 2002). Exploring the extent and type of associations between
problem-solving appraisal and a broader range of physical health variables
could provide a great deal of new information on topics with significant
societal need, such as cancer.
Examine the Utility of Enhancing Problem-Solving

Appraisal in Remedial and Preventive Interventions
This review indicated that a positive problem-solving appraisal appears to

be adaptive. A logical question then becomes, Can a person’s problem-solving
appraisal be enhanced? Indeed, a growing body of literature indicates that
problem-solving appraisal has been enhanced not only through problem-
solving training (e.g., Heppner et al., 1988) but also through psychotherapy
(Heppner et al., 2001) and career counseling (M. J. Heppner et al., in press).
Thus, it may be useful to target not only clients’ presenting problems (e.g.,
depression, study skills, cancer-related problems) but also their problem-
solving appraisal to improve their functioning and symptom reduction.
Nezu and colleagues (1989) have combined traditional cognitive inter-
ventions with problem-solving training in working with depressed patients.
Researchers might use this model in developing remedial and preventive
treatments for psychological problems, such as helplessness, suicidal
ideation, and anxiety-related disorders. Because problem solving seems to

play a role in disease progression of cancer patients (Meyer & Mark, 1995),
researchers might develop interventions that target cancer patients’ coping
processes as well as their problem-solving appraisal. Researchers might also
examine the utility of problem-solving appraisal interventions in outreach
programs for at-risk populations. Because problem-solving appraisal was
related to study skills for at-risk students (as well as career planning and
decision-making variables), research might examine the utility of interven-
tions that target problem-solving appraisal along with other interventions
aimed at enhancing academic performance. The research literature indicated
that self-appraised ineffective problem solvers tend to experience more psy-
chological distress, to be unaware of helping resources and use them less fre-
quently, and to be less satisfied with resources or training opportunities.
These findings suggest a need to develop outreach interventions to facilitate
access to and use of helping resources for ineffective problem solvers.
Because training studies have revealed dysfunctional cognitions and affec-
tive reactions of perceived ineffective problem solvers during training (see
Heppner et al., 1988; Larson et al., 1990), research might also study the cog-
nitive, affective, and behavioral operations of participants across levels of
problem-solving appraisal during outreach and preventive interventions. In
sum, it seems promising to conduct investigations aimed at enhancing partic-
ipants’ problem-solving appraisal as an integral part of remedial and preven-
tive interventions, particularly for at-risk populations. The results of such
applied research could provide not only useful new information about devel-
oping remedial and preventive interventions but also new information about
the role of problem-solving appraisal in human adjustment and promote the-
ory development.
A slightly different research strategy may be to examine whether
problem-solving appraisal as an individual difference, or personal attribute
variable, interacts with interventions to affect an array of counseling out-
comes. This recommendation is in line with Fretz’s (1981) call for attrib-
ute-treatment-interaction (ATI) research in career counseling in which he
argued that career interventions could be enhanced if researchers considered
clients’ individual differences that might interact with treatment interven-
tions. One career study (M. J. Heppner, et al., in press) found that pre-
counseling PSI scores moderated counseling outcomes so that a more nega-
tive problem-solving appraisal was associated with less positive outcomes.
The results suggest that counselors may need to use different counseling
interventions with clients who have a negative problem-solving appraisal.
There is also some preliminary data that clients’problem-solving appraisal is
positively related to their perceptions of the counseling working alliance (M. J.
Heppner et al., in press), which suggests that clients’ PSI scores are also
related to counseling process variables. Examining the role of problem-solv-

ing appraisal as an individual difference variable to enhance the effectiveness

of treatment interventions may provide useful ATI information that could
enhance counseling outcomes. Prospective and longitudinal designs examin-
ing the role of problem-solving appraisal on both the process and outcome of
counseling could be informative for both counseling practice and theory.
Several studies have identified distinctly different associations across the
three factors with various adjustment indices. Another research strategy
would be to examine how various interventions affect the three PSI compo-
nents and why. For example, Nezu and Perri (1989) found that 10 weeks of
problem-solving training resulted in significant changes on the Problem-
Solving Confidence and Personal Control scales, whereas an abbreviated
problem-solving training (that did not focus on the problem-orientation com-
ponent) resulted in significant changes only on the Approach-Avoidance
Style factor; all patterns were found at a 6-month follow-up. Heppner et al.
(1988) conducted 8 weeks of problem-solving training that focused
primarily on a number of self-management principles (e.g., self-analysis,
self-reinforcement) with minimal focus on the separate problem-solving
skills; they found that training resulted in changes at the end of training and at
1-year follow-up on the total PSI score, specifically on the Approach-
Avoidant factor. Heppner et al. (in press) found that career counseling led to
improvement in all three PSI factors. Now, it may be particularly useful to
examine process data (e.g., M. J. Heppner et al., 1988, who found significant
differences across PSI levels in the amount and type of participants’
cognitions about training, which increased over time) as well as qualitative
studies to understand more about the change process in training interventions
and especially how applied interventions affect various components of prob-
lem-solving appraisal. This area is not well understood and could provide
very useful data to inform more effective interventions for participants who
enter with very different PSI scores.
Identify Determinants of Problem-Solving Appraisal
In conceptualizing the PSI, it has been assumed that problem-solving

appraisal is the result of “countless personal experiences” (Heppner, 1988, p.
16). However, there is very little data on the development of an individual’s
problem-solving appraisal. For example, is problem-solving appraisal sim-
ply a function of a number of positive versus negative problem-solving expe-
riences? Or do some particularly powerful or traumatic experiences differen-
tially affect some individuals’problem-solving appraisal? Information about
the events that contribute to the development of problem-solving appraisal
would greatly add to the knowledge base and most likely have many implica-
tions for psychosocial interventions with children and adults.

One line of inquiry might be to examine the potential effect of stressful

and traumatic life encounters on the development of one’s problem-solving
appraisal. For example, there are some data to suggest that events such as
childhood traumas might play a role in the development of one’s problem-
solving appraisal (e.g., Reis & Heppner, 1993; Van Vliet, 1996; Wright &
Heppner, 1993). Research strategies might use longitudinal research para-
digms examining associations between childhood traumas and problem-
solving appraisal. Intensive qualitative research also might examine people’s
recollections of the impact of traumatic events on their problem-solving
appraisal.
The focus of previous research has used the PSI to predict indices of
human adjustment, with the underlying assumption that one’s problem-
solving appraisal contributes to adjustment. However, there is some evidence
to suggest that problem-solving appraisal may be both an antecedent and
consequence of depression (W. A. Dixon et al., 1993). Thus, a second line of
inquiry might examine the reciprocal nature of problem-solving appraisal
and psychological disorders. Research is needed to replicate such a recipro-
cal finding not only with depression but also with other psychological disor-
ders. For example, as this review clearly indicated, problem-solving
appraisal covaries with suicidal ideation. However, it is unclear if problem-
solving appraisal is a cause, a symptom, or a consequence of suicide ideation.
Because research suggested that problem-solving appraisal was related to
suicide ideation indirectly through its effect on hopelessness, a negative
problem-solving appraisal may be an antecedent to hopelessness. It may also
be a concomitant of hopelessness; suicidal ideation is alarming for some peo-
ple and may cause them to reevaluate their problem-solving capacities. Lon-
gitudinal research, preferably with clinical samples, is needed to test a com-
plex transactional model of problem solving and suicidal ideation as well as
suicidal behavior and may promote more understanding of the development
of problem-solving appraisal. If problem-solving appraisal is also a conse-
quence of various psychological disorders, this information may be helpful
in developing psychological interventions as well as informing subsequent
theory development.
Further Explicate the Role of Problem-Solving Appraisal in Coping

The research clearly suggests a strong association between problem-
solving appraisal and various coping activities, particularly problem-focused
coping. This line of research is particularly important because it provides
insight into how people cope with difficult and stressful problems. Research
that further explicates the role of problem-solving appraisal within the com-

plex and probably multidetermined coping process would facilitate both the-
ory development and practice implications.
One research strategy to increase knowledge about the coping process
would be to construct and test models that depict the role of problem-solving
appraisal and other constructs within the coping process through more
complex statistical methods. For example, studies might examine whether
problem-solving appraisal serves a moderating or mediating role between
variables such as level of stress and problem-focused coping (see section on
Depression for such designs). Other research might employ structural equa-
tion modeling to examine potential complex relationships among variables
such as problem-solving appraisal, problem- and emotion-focused coping,
help seeking, and outcomes of coping, such as degree of problem resolution.
It is possible that there are multiple paths to problem resolution across differ-
ent problem types, with complex interactions among coping, help seeking,
and problem-solving appraisal. Both theory and practice could be enhanced
by testing more complex and comprehensive models of the coping process in
hopes of identifying more specific relations between problem-solving
appraisal, various coping activities, and problem resolution.
Another research strategy would be to use analog designs to identify
important differences between individuals who perceive themselves as effec-
tive versus ineffective problem solvers. Granted there are many challenges in
using laboratory or hypothetical problem-solving studies, particularly
related to external validity (see Heppner & Wang, 2003), but such studies
lend themselves to greater experimental control. These types of methodolo-
gies have been underutilized in the PSI literature but may facilitate greater
understanding of cognitive, behavioral, and affective operations across indi-
viduals with different levels of problem-solving appraisal. Three studies
(Heppner et al., 1988; Larson et al., 1990; Mayo & Tanaka-Matsumi, 1996)
provide methodologies that enhanced understanding of cognitive and affec-
tive operations across different levels of problem-solving appraisal and that
might be useful in future studies. In addition, although a number of investiga-
tors have suggested that important problem-solving differences may be
found across different problem types (e.g., Heppner & Krauskopf, 1987;
Janis & Mann, 1977; Wickelgren, 1974), relatively little research has been
conducted in this area. Using hypothetical laboratory problems lends itself to
exercising a great deal of experimental control over different problems or
even different dimensions or characteristics of the problems being examined
(see Heppner & Krauskopf, 1987). Research using hypothetical problems
would be well suited to examining the associations between different types of
problems (or problem characteristics) and problem-solving appraisal with
subsequent cognitive, affective, and behavioral operations in coping.

Implications of Problem-Solving
Appraisal Research for Practitioners
Our review of the literature has delineated the robust role of problem-
solving appraisal in predicting a host of adaptive behaviors. Although it is
important that the findings of this review be applied to practice with caution,
problem-solving appraisal is a construct that has a great deal of relevance to a
broad range of practitioners including licensed professional counselors,
social workers, managed health care professionals, and student services per-
sonnel. The implications of problem-solving appraisal for practice are many
and varied (see Heppner, 1983; Heppner & Baker, 1997; Heppner & Wang,
2003). This section will briefly discuss implications for practice within three
major areas: conceptualization diagnosis, treatment interventions, and
evaluation of service delivery. Being aware of clients’PSI score can give the
counselor a significant amount of information about their problem-solving
appraisal and raise hypotheses about their psychological and vocational
adjustment and the conceptualization and diagnoses of clients’psychological
dynamics. Clients’problem-solving appraisal also can be helpful in planning
and conducting treatment interventions and can help provide an evaluation of
service delivery to clients.
Conceptualization and Diagnosis

Knowledge of client’s problem-solving appraisal scores can quickly pro-
vide a practitioner with information about a client’s problem-solving
strengths and weaknesses and, subsequently, raise a number of hypotheses to
more fully understand the client’s psychological dynamics relative to his or
her presenting problems. The PSI provides important information about how
the client may be coping with his or her presenting problems, specifically
whether a client tends to approach or avoid problems, lacks confidence in his
or her problem solving, and feels emotionally in control. For example, the
client’s avoidance of interpersonal conflict may be leading to more interper-
sonal difficulties. Thus, with knowledge of a client’s general tendency to
avoid problems, the counselor may be able to more quickly and fully under-
stand and conceptualize the client’s presenting problem and psychological
dynamics.
In addition, the PSI can be used to predict various indices of psychological
adjustment, such as depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation. For example,
if a client comes to counseling with a negative problem-solving appraisal
coupled with a sense of hopelessness and depression, the likelihood of the
client having suicidal thoughts is greater than if he or she were depressed and

hopeless but had a more positive problem-solving appraisal. Similarly, a cli-

ent with a negative problem-solving appraisal is likely to focus less on resolv-
ing the cause of the problem and engage in more emotion-focused coping.
Moreover, there is a greater likelihood that a client with a negative problem-
solving appraisal will experience more negative and disruptive cognitions as
well as more intensely negative affective reactions. Thus, knowing a client’s
PSI score can provide not only important information about a client’s problem-
solving style but also working hypotheses about his or her cognitive and
affective processes, coping activities, and potential psychological and career
adjustment.
Treatment Interventions
Treatment decisions can also be informed and enhanced by the PSI (see
Heppner & Baker, 1997). For example, a client with a highly avoidant
problem-solving style might prompt the practitioner to explore the reasons
underlying the avoidant tendencies, particularly when the avoidance relates
to the client’s presenting problem. In addition, the counselor can use this
knowledge of the client’s style to modify interventions, such as providing
more prompting and reinforcement of new behaviors for avoidant clients. If
clients lack confidence in their problem solving, they may need more emo-
tional support to complete homework assignments or other interventions
designed by the counselor and to develop a sense of self-efficacy to respond
appropriately to issues pertaining to their presenting problem. Helping pro-
fessionals might assist such clients by identifying specific goals and tasks
and how to take small steps toward their completion. The client could be
helped to feel success and reinforcement, could receive verbal reinforcement
from the counselor and others, and could participate in group interventions to
see others like themselves succeeding in the change process.
PSI scores also can suggest which clients will benefit most from interven-
tions and which may encounter the most obstacles (see Heppner, Cooper,
et al., 2001; Heppner et al., 1988), thus aiding practitioners in planning treat-
ment interventions. For example, the self-appraised effective problem solv-
ers are likely to think about the interventions more (Heppner et al., 1988) and
report higher levels of satisfaction with interventions (e.g., Heppner &
Krieshok, 1983), more resolution of their presenting problems in counseling
(e.g., Heppner, Cooper, et al., 2001), and more gains from training interven-
tions (e.g., Heppner et al., 1988). If a client has a positive problem-solving
appraisal, research would suggest that on average, this client has a greater
possibility of successfully resolving his or her problem. Conversely, if the
person has a negative problem-solving appraisal, research would suggest that

he or she may be less likely to feel satisfied with the intervention (e.g.,
Heppner & Krieshok, 1983) and less likely to resolve his or her presenting
problems (Heppner, Cooper, et al., 2001). If clients come to career counsel-
ing with a positive problem-solving appraisal, the likelihood that they will
have more effective outcomes in both career and psychological adjustment is
considerably greater (M. J. Heppner et al., in press). Thus, knowledge of cli-
ents’ PSI scores can be helpful in planning and evaluating case assignments
and in foreseeing the type of obstacles that clients may encounter and how
satisfied clients will be.
Problem-solving training has received considerable attention (see reviews
by D’Zurilla & Nezu, 1982; Heppner & Hillerbrand, 1991). For example,
training has focused on enhancing specific problem-solving skills, such as
decision making (e.g., Nezu & D’Zurilla, 1979), altering self-measurement
principles (e.g., Heppner et al., 1988), and increasing problem-solving confi-
dence (e.g., Heppner et al., 1988). Training has varied from 45 minutes (e.g.,
Nezu & D’Zurilla, 1979) to 2 months (e.g., Heppner et al., 1988). Research
has indicated that problem-solving training is a successful intervention strat-
egy for specific presenting problems such as depression (e.g., Nezu et al.,
1989).
Thus, problem-solving training may be a helpful intervention for a range
of client problems that have been predicted by problem-solving appraisal.
Practitioners might design interventions for a variety of presenting problems
and disorders that include problem-specific interventions (e.g., Stein et al.,
2001) along with general problem-solving training components addressing
problem-solving confidence and avoidance tendencies (see Etringer et al.,
1989; Soukup et al., 1990). Moreover, because problem-solving appraisal is
associated with a broad range of psychological, vocational-adjustment, and
physical health indices, problem-solving training might profitably be incor-
porated into preventive interventions (see Heppner, Neal, & Larson, 1984).
For example, because problem-solving appraisal is associated with a broad
range of adaptive outcomes, it may be helpful to promote the development of
effective problem-solving skills (and consequently a positive problem-
solving appraisal) in settings such as schools (K-12) and through a variety of
programs, such as marriage enrichment programs and parent effectiveness
training. Because research indicates that individuals with a negative
problem-solving appraisal are at risk for depression under high levels of
stress (e.g., Cheng & Lam, 1997; Nezu & Ronan, 1988), preventive interven-
tions might profitably be developed in schools and universities for at-risk
individuals. In short, the research suggests that practitioners might develop
remedial and preventive interventions aimed at a variety of societal problems
that incorporate problem-solving training components.

Evaluation of Service Delivery
One might legitimately ask that when counseling is considered effective,

is the client more confident in his or her problem solving? Less avoidant of
problem-solving situations? If so, how much less avoidant? If not, why not?
(Caren Cooper, personal communication, February 1995). Problem-solving
appraisal can be conceptualized as a useful outcome index for evaluating ser-
vice delivery in counseling centers, treatment facilities, and community
agencies. For example, the PSI has been used both as a pretest and posttest
evaluation to determine change over the course of counseling (e.g., M. J.
Heppner et al., in press; Heppner, Cooper, et al., 2001). In addition, the PSI
has been found to be useful as an outcome variable to assess the effective-
ness of problem-solving training interventions (e.g., Heppner et al., 1988;
Nezu & Perri, 1989) and telephone interventions with primary caregivers of
stroke survivors (Grant, 1999). Because the PSI is strongly associated with
clients’ psychological and vocational adjustment, it can be a useful outcome
and evaluation variable.

The PSI can be used not only to assess problem-solving appraisal but also
to generate hypotheses and influence the diagnosis, treatment, and evaluation
of service delivery for a wide range of clients and psychological problems. In
this regard, the PSI could provide useful information for individual counsel-
ing, group counseling, marriage counseling, clinical supervision, career
counseling, and structured program interventions. A relatively short assess-
ment tool like the PSI can help practitioners examine clients’ problem-
solving style and develop working hypotheses for additional assessment,
design more targeted interventions, and evaluate their service delivery.
Research on the PSI also points to the need for both remedial and preventive
interventions that incorporate problem-solving components for a number
presenting problems, particularly depression, suicidality, anxiety, and
career-related problems. In addition, the research strongly suggests that
interventions incorporating problem-solving components might be particu-
larly helpful for at-risk individuals under high levels of stress.
FINAL COMMENT
Twenty years ago, the PSI was published as a measure of problem-solving

appraisal and was among the first self-report inventories developed to assess
the perceived cognitive, affective, and behavioral activities people use in

resolving difficult problems. More than 120 studies have established consis-
tent patterns in the knowledge base. However, as knowledge accumulates,
more complex questions should be examined that stimulate additional
research and theory development. We hope that research will continue to
expand knowledge about problem-solving appraisal and stimulate additional
theory development in problem solving, depression, suicide, and other areas
of concern to the helping professions. But most important, because problem-
solving appraisal is learned, it implies it is amenable to change, thus provid-
ing hope for millions to bring positive change to their lives. There appear to
be many exciting possibilities for applied interventions to build on people’s
strengths in problem-solving appraisal to enhance life satisfaction and well-
being.
REFERENCES
Achenbach, T., & Edelbrock, C. (1983). Manual for the Child Behavior Checklist and revised
Child Behavior Profile. Unpublished manuscript, Departments of Psychiatry and Psychol-
ogy, University of Vermont. (Available from the first author)
Allred, K. D., & Smith, T. W. (1989). The hardy personality: Cognitive and physiological
responses to evaluative threat. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 257-266.
American Psychiatric Association. (1987). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disor-
ders (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Andersen, B. L., Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K., & Glaser, R. (1994). A biobehavioral model of cancer
stress and disease course. American Psychologist, 49, 389-404.
Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Annis, H. M., & Davis, C. S. (1989). Relapse prevention training: A cognitive-behavioral
approach based on self-efficacy theory. Journal of Chemical Dependency Treatment, 2, 81-
103.
Antonovsky, A. (1979). Health, stress, and coping. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37,
122-147.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Barlow, D. H. (2000). Unraveling the mysteries of anxiety and its disorders from the perspective
of emotion theory. American Psychologist, 55, 1247-1263.
Baumgardner, A. H., Heppner, P. P., & Arkin, R. M. (1986). Role of causal attribution in personal
problem solving. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 636-643.
Ben-Yishay, Y., & Prigatano, G. P. (1990). Cognitive remediation. In M. Rosenthal, E. R.
Griffith, M. R. Bond, & J. D Miller (Eds.), Rehabilitation of the adult and child with trau-
matic brain injury (2nd ed., pp. 393-409). Philadelphia: Davis.
Black, C. (1982). It will never happen to me. Denver, CO: Mac Publishing.
Blankstein, K. R., Flett, G. L., & Batten, I. (1989). Test anxiety and problem-solving self-
appraisals of college students. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 4, 531-540.
Blankstein, K. R., Flett, G. L., & Watson, M. S. (1992). Coping and academic problem-solving
ability in test anxiety. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 48, 37-46.

Bolger, N. (1990). Coping as a personality process: A prospective study. Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 59, 525-537.
Bonner, R. L., & Rich, A. R. (1987). Toward a predictive model of suicidal ideation and behavior:
Some preliminary data in college students. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 17, 50-63.
Bonner, R. L., & Rich, A. R. (1988). Negative life stress, social problem-solving self-appraisal,
and hopelessness: Implications for suicide research. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 12,
549-556.
Bonner, R. L., & Rich, A. R. (1990). Psychosocial vulnerability, life stress, and suicide ideation
in a jail population: A cross-validation study. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 20,
213-224.
Bonner, R. L., & Rich, A. R. (1992). Cognitive vulnerability and hopelessness among correc-
tional inmates: A state of mind model. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 17, 113-122.
Brack, G., LaClave, L., & Wyatt, A. S. (1992). The relationship of problem solving and
reframing to stress and depression in female college students. Journal of College Student
Development, 33, 124-131.
Brems, C., & Johnson, M. E. (1989). Problem-solving appraisal and coping style: The influence
of sex-role orientation and gender. Journal of Psychology, 123, 187-194.
Brown, A. L. (1977). Knowing when, where, and how to remember: A problem of
metacognition. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in Instructional Psychology (pp. 77-165).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Butler, L., & Meichenbaum, D. (1981). The assessment of interpersonal problem-solving skills.
In P. C. Kendall & S. D. Hollen (Eds.), Assessment Strategies for Cognitive Behavioral Inter-
ventions (pp. 197-225). New York: Academic Press.
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1981). Social psychological procedures for cognitive response
assessment: The thought-listing technique. In T. V. Merluzzi, C. R. Glass, & M. Genest
(Eds.), Cognitive Assessment (pp. 309-342). New York: Guilford.
Campanelli, M., Bove, M. T., & D’Annuzio, A. (1993, January). The effects of fluoxetine in the
therapeutic approach to female obesity: Modification of some personality repertoires. Paper
presented at the Second International Congress for Eating Disorders, Rome.
Campbell, D. T. (1960). Recommendations for APA test standards regarding construct, trait, or
discriminant validity. American Psychologist, 15, 546-553.
Cannon, B., Mulroy, R., Otto, M. W., Rosenbaum, J. F., Fava, M., & Nierenberg, A. A. (1999).
Dysfunctional attitudes and poor problem solving skills predict hopelessness in major
depression. Journal of Affective Disorders, 55, 45-49.
Carscaddon, D. M., Poston, J., & Sachs, E. (1988). Problem-solving appraisal as it relates to
state-trait personality factors. A Journal of Human Behavior, 25, 73-76.
Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Pozo, C. (1992). Conceptualizing the process of coping with
health problems. In H. S. Friedman (Ed.), Hostility, coping, and health (pp. 167-187). Wash-
ington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Cermak, T. L. (1986). Diagnosing and treating co-dependence: A guide for professionals who
work with chemical dependents, their spouses and children. Minneapolis, MN: Johnson
Institute Books.
Chartrand, J. M., Rose, M. L., Elliott, T. R., Marmarosh, C., & Caldwell, S. (1993). Peeling back
the onion: Personality, problem solving and career decision-making style correlates of career
indecision. Journal of Career Assessment, 1, 66-82.
Cheng, S. K., & Lam, D. J. (1997). Relationships among life stress, problem solving, self-
esteem, and dysphoria in Hong Kong adolescents: Test of a model. Journal of Social and
Clinical Psychology, 16, 343-355.
Chynoweth, G. H., Blankinship, D. A., & Parker, M. W. (1986). The binomial expansion: Simpli-
fying the evaluation process. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 645-647.

Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1991). General affective dispositions in physical and psychological
health. In C. R. Snyder & D. R. Forsyth (Eds.), Handbook of social and clinical psychology:
The health perspective (pp. 221-245). Elmsford, NY: Pergamon.
Clum, G. A., & Febbraro, G. A. R. (1994). Stress, social support, and problem-solving appraisal
skills: Prediction of suicide severity within a college sample. Journal of Psychotherapy and
Behavioral Assessment, 16, 69-83.
Cook, E. P. (1990). Gender and psychological distress. Journal of Counseling and Development,
68, 371-375.
Cook, S. W., & Heppner, P. P. (1997). A psychometric study of three coping measures. Educa-
tional and Psychological Measurement, 57, 906-923.
Corcoran, C. M. (1991). Self-appraised personal problem solving in an inmate population.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia.
Courtois, C. A. (1988). Healing the incest wound: Adult survivors in therapy. New York: Norton.
Coyne, D. C., & Lazarus, R. S. (1980). Cognitive style, stress perception, and coping. In D. C.
Kutash & A. L. B. Schlesinger (Eds.), Handbook on stress and anxiety (pp. 144-158). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Crites, J. C. (1978). Career maturity inventory: Theory and research handbook (2nd ed.).
Monterey, CA: McGraw-Hill.
Crowne, D., & Marlowe, D. (1964). The approved motive. New York: Wiley.
Davey, G. C. (1994). Worrying, social problem-solving abilities, and social problem-solving
confidence. Behavior Research & Therapy, 32, 327-330.
Davey, G. C., Hampton, J., Farrell, J., & Davidson, S. (1992). Some characteristics of worrying:
Evidence for worrying and anxiety as separate constructs. Personality and Individual Differ-
ences, 13, 133-147.
Davey, G. C., Tallis, F., & Capuzzo, N. (1996). Beliefs about the consequences of worrying. Cog-
nitive Therapy and Research, 20, 499-520.
DeClue, G. S. (1983). Patterns of intellectual functioning, ability, personality, and problem solv-
ing style. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. New York: Heath.
Dixon, D. N., & Glover, J. A. (1984). Counseling: A problem solving approach. New York:
Wiley.
Dixon, W. A. (2000). Problem-solving appraisal and depression: Evidence for a recovery model.
Journal of Counseling and Development, 78, 87-91.
Dixon, W. A., Heppner, P. P., & Anderson, W. P. (1991). Problem-solving appraisal, stress, hope-
lessness, and suicide ideation in a college population. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38,
51-56.
Dixon, W. A., Heppner, P. P., Burnett, J. W., Anderson, W. P., & Wood, P. K. (1993). Distinguish-
ing among antecedents, concomitants, and consequences of problem-solving appraisal and
depressive symptoms. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 40, 357-364.
Dixon, W. A., Heppner, P. P., & Rudd, M. (1994). Problem-solving appraisal, hopelessness, and
suicide ideation: Evidence for a mediational model. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 41,
91-98.
Dohrenwend, B. S., & Dohrenwend, B. P. (1978). Some issues in research on stressful life events.
Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease, 166, 7-15.
Dollard, J., & Miller, N. E. (1950). Personality and psychotherapy; an analysis in terms of learn-
ing, thinking, and culture. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Dorner, D. (1983). Heuristics and cognition in complex systems. In M. G. R. Groner, & W. F.
Bischof (Eds.), Method in heuristics (pp. 89-107). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Dugas, M. J., Letarte, H., Rheaume, J., Freeston, M. H., & Ladouceur, R. (1995). Worry and
problem solving: Evidence of a specific relationship. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 19,
109-120.
Durlak, J. A. (1983). Social problem solving as a preliminary prevention strategy. In R. D. Flener,
L. A. Jason, J. N. Moritsugu, & S. S. Faber (Eds.), Preventive psychology: Theory, research
and practice (pp. 31-48). New York: Pergamon.
D’Zurilla, T. J. (1986). Problem-solving therapy: A social competence approach to clinical
intervention. New York: Springer.
D’Zurilla, T. J., & Goldfried, M. R. (1971). Problem solving and behavior modification. Journal
of Abnormal Psychology, 78, 107-126.
D’Zurilla, T. J., & Nezu, A. (1982). Social problem solving adults. In P. C. Kendall (Ed.),
Advances in cognitive-behavioral research and therapy (pp. 202-275). Orlando, FL: Aca-
demic Press.
D’Zurilla, T. J., & Nezu, A. M. (1990). Development and preliminary evaluation of the Social
Problem-Solving Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 2, 156-163.
D’Zurilla, T. J., & Nezu, A. M. (1999). Problem solving therapy: A social competence approach
to clinical intervention (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.
Educational Testing Service (1979). School and college ability tests (SCAT): Series IIII. Menlo
Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.
Elliott, T. R. (1992). Problem-solving appraisal, oral contraceptive use, and menstrual pain.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 286-297.
Elliott, T. R., Godshall, F. J., Herrick, S. M., Witty, T. E., & Spruell, M. (1991). Problem-solving
appraisal and psychological adjustment following spinal cord injury. Cognitive Therapy and
Research, 15, 387-398.
Elliott, T. R., Godshall, F., Shrout, J. R., & Witty, T. E. (1990). Problem-solving appraisal, self-
reported study habits, and performance of academically at-risk college students. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 37, 203-207.
Elliott, T. R., Herrick, S. M., MacNair, R. R., & Harkins, S. W. (1994). Personality correlates of
self-appraised problem solving ability: Problem orientation and trait affectivity. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 63, 489-505.
Elliott, T. R., Herrick, S. M., & Witty, T. E. (1992). Problem-solving appraisal and the effects of
social support among college students and persons with physical disabilities. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 39, 219-226.
Elliott, T. R., & Marmarosh, C. L. (1994). Problem-solving appraisal, health complaints, and
health-related expectancies. Journal of Counseling and Development, 72, 531-537.
Elliott, T. R., Sherwin, E., Harkins, S. W., & Marmarosh, C. (1995). Self-appraised problem-
solving ability, affective states, and psychological distress. Journal of Counseling Psychol-
ogy, 42, 105-115.
Elliot, T. R., Shewchuk, R., Hagglund, K., Rybarczyk, B., & Harkins, S. (1996). Occupational
burnout, tolerance for stress, and coping among nurses in rehabilitation units. Rehabilitation
Psychology, 41, 267-284.
Elliot, T. R., Shewchuk, R., Richeson, C., Pickelman, H., & Franklin, K. W. (1996). Problem-
solving appraisal and the prediction of depression during pregnancy and in the postpartum
period. Journal of Counseling and Development, 74, 645-651.
Ellis, T. E., Rudd, M., Rajab, M., & Wehrly, T. E. (1996). Cluster analysis of MCMI scores of sui-
cidal psychiatric patients: Four personality profiles. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 52, 411-
422.
Endler, N. S., & Parker, J. D. (1990). Multidimensional assessment of coping: A critical evalua-
tion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 844-854.

Etringer, B. D., Altmaier, E. M., & Bowers, W. (1989). An investigation into the cognitive func-
tioning of bulimic women. Journal of Counseling and Development, 68, 216-219.
Felton, G. M., Liu, Q., Parsons, M. A., & Geslani, G. P. (1998). Health-promoting behaviors of
rural adolescent women. Women & Health, 27, 67-80.
Felton, G. M., Parsons, M. A., & Bartoces, M. G. (1997). Demographic factors: Interaction
effects on health-promoting behavior and health related factors. Public Health Nursing, 14,
361-367.
Finkelhor, D. (1979). Sexually victimized children. New York: Free Press.
Fisher, S. (1986). Stress and strategy. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Flavell, J. H., & Wellman, H. M. (1977). Metamemory. In R. V. Kail & J. W. Hagen (Eds.), Per-
spectives on the development of memory and cognition (pp. 3-34). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Folkman, S. (1984). Personal control and stress and coping processes: A theoretical analysis.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 839-852.
Folkman, S., Lazarus, R. S., Dunkel-Schetter, C., Delongis, A., & Gruen, R. (1986). Dynamics of
a stressful encounter: Cognitive appraisal, coping, and encounter outcomes. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 50, 992-1003.
Fraser, K. P., & Tucker, C. M. (1997). Individuation, stress, and problem-solving abilities of col-
lege students. Journal of College Student Development, 38, 461-467.
Fretz, B. R. (1981). Evaluating the effectiveness of career interventions. Journal of Counseling
Friedman, H. S. (Ed.). (1992). Hostility, coping, & health. Washington, DC: American Psycho-
logical Association.
Funk, S. C., & Houston, B. (1987). A critical analysis of the Hardiness Scale’s validity and utility.
Geiser, R. (1979). Hidden victims: The sexual abuse of children. Boston: Beacon.
Gelman, D. (1994, April). The mystery of suicide. Newsweek, 44-49.
Godshall, F. J., & Elliott, T. R. (1997). Behavioral correlates of self-appraised problem-solving
ability: Problem-solving skills and health-compromising behaviors. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 27, 929-944.
Goisman, R. M., Allsworth, J., Rogers, M. P., Warshaw, M. G., Goldenberg, I., Vasile, R. G., et al.
(1998). Simple phobia as a comorbid anxiety disorder. Depression and Anxiety, 7, 105-112.
Goldapple, G. C., & Montgomery, D. (1993). Evaluating a behaviorally based intervention to
improve client retention in therapeutic community treatment for drug dependency. Research
on Social Work Practice, 3, 21-39.
Grant, J. S. (1999). Social problem-solving partnerships with family caregivers. Rehabilitation
Nursing, 24, 245-260.
Grant, J. S., Elliott, T. R., Giger, J. N., & Bartolucci, A. A. (2001). Social problem-solving abili-
ties, social support, and adjustment among family caregivers of individuals with a stroke.
Rehabilitation Psychology, 46, 44-57.
Hammen, C. L. (1985). Predicting depression: A cognitive-behavioral perspective. In P. C.
Kendall (Ed.), Advances in cognitive-behavioral research and therapy (pp. 29-71). San
Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Hanson, K. M., & Mintz, L. B. (1997). Psychological health and problem-solving self-appraisal
in older adults. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 44, 433-441.
Harrison, H. A. (1994). The relationship among Jungian psychological type preferences, prob-
lems experienced, and perceived problem-solving capabilities for African Americans hold-
ing graduate degrees. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, St. Louis University.

Haught, P. A., Hill, L. A., Nardi, A. H., & Walls, R. T. (2000). Perceived ability and level of edu-
cation as predictors of traditional and practical adult problem solving. Experimental Aging
Research, 26, 89-101.
Henry, P. (1996). Perceived problem-solving and vocational identity: Implication for nontradi-
tional premedical students. Psychological Reports, 78, 843-847.
Henry, P. (1999). Relationship between perceived problem solving and career maturity: Implica-
tions for minority and disadvantaged premedical students. Psychological Reports, 84, 1040-
1046.
Heppner, M. J., Lee, D., Heppner, P. P., McKinnon, L. C., Multon, K. D., & Gysbers, N. C. (in
press). Examining the role of problem-solving appraisal in the process and outcome of career
counseling. Journal of Vocational Behavior.
Heppner, P. P. (1983). Strategies for facilitating client’s personal problem solving. In P. A. Keller
& L. G. Ritt (Eds.), Innovations in clinical practice: A source book (Vol. 2, pp. 73-85).
Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Exchange.
Heppner, P. P. (1987). Introduction: Broadening the conceptualization of problem solving in
career planning. Journal of Career Development, 14, 2-7.
Heppner, P. P. (1988). The Problem Solving Inventory (PSI): Manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting
Psychologists.
Heppner, P. P., & Anderson, W. P. (1985). On the perceived non-utility of research in counseling.
Heppner, P. P., & Baker, C. E. (1997). Applications of the Problem Solving Inventory. Measure-
ment and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 29, 229-241.
Heppner, P. P., Baumgardner, A., & Jackson, J. (1985). Problem solving self-appraisal, depres-
sion, and attributional styles: Are they related? Cognitive Therapy and Research, 9, 105-113.
Heppner, P. P., Baumgardner, A. H., Larson, L. M., & Petty, R. E. (1988). The utility of problem
solving training that emphasizes self-management principles. Counseling Psychology Quar-
terly, 1, 129-143.
Heppner, P. P., Cook, S. W., Strozier, A. L., & Heppner, M. J. (1991). An investigation of coping
styles and gender differences with farmers in career transition. Journal of Counseling Psy-
chology, 38, 167-174.
Heppner, P. P., Cook, S. W., Wright, D. M., & Johnson, W. C., Jr. (1995). Progress in resolving
problems: A problem-focused style of coping. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42, 279-
293.
Heppner, P. P., Cooper, C. C., Mulholland, A. M., & Wei, M. F. (2001). A brief, multidimen-
sional, problem solving based psychotherapy outcome measure. Journal of Counseling Psy-
chology, 48, 330-343.
Heppner, P. P., Hibel, J. H., Neal, G. W., Weinstein, C. L., & Rabinowitz, F. E. (1982). Personal
problem solving: A descriptive study of individual differences. Journal of Counseling Psy-
chology, 24, 580-590.
Heppner, P. P., & Hillerbrand, E. T. (1991). Problem-solving training: Implications for remedial
and preventive training. In C. R. Snyder & D. R. Forsyth (Eds.), Handbook of social and clini-
cal psychology: The healthy perspective (pp. 681-698). Elmsford, NY: Pergamon.
Heppner, P. P., Kampa, M., & Brunning, L. (1987). The relationship between problem solving
self-appraisal and indices of physical and psychological health. Cognitive Therapy and
Research, 11, 155-168.
Heppner, P. P., Kivlighan, D., Jr., & Wampold, B. E. (1999). Research design in counseling (2nd
ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Heppner, P. P., & Krauskopf, C. J. (1987). An information-processing approach to personal prob-
lem solving. The Counseling Psychologist, 15, 371-447.

Heppner, P. P., & Krieshok, T. S. (1983). An applied investigation of problem-solving appraisal,

vocational identity, and career service requests, utilization, and subsequent evaluations. The
Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 31, 240-249.
Heppner, P. P., & Lee, D. (2002). Problem-solving appraisal and psychological adjustment. In
C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 288-298). New
York: Oxford University Press.
Heppner, P. P., Lee, D., Wei, M., Anderson, C., & Wang, Y. (2001). Does negative affectivity con-
found the problem solving-psychological adjustment link? Paper presented at the meeting of
the American Psychological Association, San Francisco.
Heppner, P. P., Manley, C. M., Perez, R. M., & Dixon, W. A. (1994). An adolescent version of the
Problem Solving Inventory: Initial reliability and validity estimates. Unpublished
manuscript.
Heppner, P. P., Neal, G. W., & Larson, L. M. (1984). Problem-solving training as prevention with
college students. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 62, 514-519.
Heppner, P. P., & Petersen, C. H. (1982). The development and implications of a personal
problem-solving inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 29, 66-75.
Heppner, P. P., Pretorius, T. B., Wei, M., Lee, D., & Wang, Y. (2002). Examining the
generalizability of problem-solving appraisal in Black South Africans. Journal of Counsel-
ing Psychology, 49, 484-498.
Heppner, P. P., & Reeder, B. L. (1984). Training in problem-solving for residence hall staff: Who
is most satisfied? Journal of College Student Personnel, 25, 357-360.
Heppner, P. P., Reeder, B. L., & Larson, L. M. (1983). Cognitive variables associated with per-
sonal problem-solving appraisal: Implications for counseling. Journal of Counseling Psy-
chology, 30, 537-545.
Heppner, P. P., Walther, D. J., & Good, G. E. (1995). The differential role of instrumentality,
expressivity, and social support in predicting problem-solving appraisal in men and women.
Sex Roles, 32, 91-108.
Heppner, P. P., & Wang, Y. (2003). Problem-solving appraisal. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder
(Eds.), Positive psychological assessment: A handbook of models and measures (pp. 127-
138). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Herrick, S., Elliott, T. R., & Crow, F. (1994). Self-appraised problem-solving skills and the pre-
diction of secondary complications among persons with spinal cord injuries. Journal of Clin-
ical Psychology in Medical Settings, 1, 269-283.
Hoffman, M. A., & Driscoll, J. M. (2000). Health promotion and disease prevention: A concen-
tric biopsychosocial model of health status. In Steven D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Hand-
book of Counseling Psychology (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.
Holland, J. L. (1973). Making vocational choices: A theory of careers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Holland, J. L., & Holland, J. E. (1977). Vocational indecision: More evidence and speculation.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 24, 404-414.
Holmes, T., & Rahe, R. (1967). The Social Readjustment Rating Scale. Journal of Psychoso-
matic Research, 11, 213-218.
Horan, J. L. (1979). Counseling for effective decision making: A cognitive behavioral perspec-
tive. North Sacituate, MA: Duxbury Press.
Houston, B. (1987). Stress and coping. In C. R. Snyder & C. E. Ford (Eds.), Coping with negative
life events (pp. 373-399). New York: Plenum.
Janis, I. L., & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice,
and commitment. New York: Free Press.
Jarwan, F. (1985). The effectiveness of a vocational counseling program in vocational maturity
and vocational decision-making. Unpublished master’s thesis, Yarmonk University, Jordan.

Kagan, N. (1975). Interpersonal process recall: A method for influencing human interaction.
East Lansing: Michigan State University.
Kessler, R. C., McGonagle, K. A., Zhao, S., Nelson, C. B., Hughes, M., Eshleman, S., et al.
(1994). Lifetime and 12-month prevalence of DSM-III—R psychiatric disorders in the
United States: Results from the National Comorbidity Study. Archives of General Psychia-
try, 51, 8-19.
Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K., & Glaser, R. (1995). Psychoneuroimmunology and health consequences:
Data and shared mechanisms. Psychosomatic Medicine, 57, 269-274.
Kim, B. S., Atkinson, D. R., & Umemoto, D. (2001). Asian cultural values and the counseling
process: Current knowledge and directions for future research. The Counseling Psychologist,
29, 570-603.
Kobasa, S. C. (1979). Stressful life events, personality, and health: An inquiry into hardiness.
Kobasa, S. C. (1982). Commitment and coping in stress resistance among lawyers. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 707-717.
Krumboltz, J. D. (1965). Behavioral counseling: Rationale and research. Personnel and Guid-
ance Journal, 44, 383-387.
Laporte, L., Sabourin, S., & Wright, J. (1988). L’inventaire de resolution de problemes
personels: Une perspective metocognitive. International Journal of Psychology, 23, 569-
581.
Larson, L. M. (1984). Training self-appraised effective and ineffective problem solvers in asser-
tion. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Missouri, Columbia.
Larson, L. M., Allen, S. J., Imao, R. A., & Piersel, W. C. (1993). Self-perceived effective and
ineffective problem solvers’ differential views of their partners’ problem-solving styles.
Larson, L. M., & Heppner, P. P. (1985). The relationship of problem-solving appraisal to career
decision and indecision. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 26, 55-65.
Larson, L. M., & Heppner, P. P. (1989). Problem-solving appraisal in an alcoholic population.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 36, 73-78.
Larson, L. M., Heppner, P. P., Ham, T., & Dugan, K. (1988). Investigating multiple subtypes of
career indecision through cluster analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 35, 439-446.
Larson, L. M., Piersel, W. C., Imao, R. A., & Allen, S. J. (1990). Significant predictors of prob-
lem-solving appraisal. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37, 482-490.
Larson, L. M., Potenza, M. T., Wennstedt, L. W., & Sailors, P. J. (1995). Personal problem solv-
ing in a simulated setting: Do perceptions accurately reflect behavior? Cognitive Therapy
and Research, 19, 241-257.
Larson, L. M., & Sailors, P. J. (1997). Perceived effective problem solvers’ attributions concern-
ing success and failure of a simulated real-life problem. Behavior Modification, 21, 341-354.
Larson, L. M., Toulouse, A. L., Ngumba, W. E., Fitzpatrick, L. A., & Heppner, P. P. (1994). The
development and validation of Coping with Career Indecision. Journal of Career Assess-
ment, 2, 91-110.
Lazarus, R. S. (1966). Psychological stress and the coping process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lazarus, R. S. (2000). Toward better research on stress and coping. American Psychologist, 55,
665-673.
Lazarus, R. S., DeLongis, A., Folkman, S., & Gruen, R. (1985). Stress and adaptational out-
comes: The problem of confounded measures. American Psychologist, 40, 770-785.
Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.
Lefcourt, H. M. (1966). Internal versus external control of reinforcement: A review. Psychologi-
cal Bulletin, 65, 206-220.

Long, B. C., Kahn, S. E., & Schutz, R. W. (1992). Causal model of stress and coping: Women in
management. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 39, 227-239.
MacNair, R. R., & Elliott, T. R. (1992). Self-perceived problem-solving ability, stress appraisal,
and coping over time. Journal of Research in Personality, 26, 150-164.
Marcotte, D., Alain, M., & Gosselin, M.-J. (1999). Gender differences in adolescent depression:
Gender-typed characteristics or problem-solving skills deficits? Sex Roles, 41, 31-48.
Mayo, V. D., & Tanaka-Matsumi, J. (1996). Think aloud statements and solutions of dysphoric
persons on a social problem-solving task. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 20, 97-113.
McCracken, R. S., & Weitzman, L. M. (1997). Relationship of personal agency, problem-solving
appraisal, and traditionality of career choice to women’s attitudes toward multiple role plan-
ning. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 44, 149-159.
McCubbin, H. I., & Patterson, J. M. (1982). Family adaptation to crisis. In H. I. McCubbin, A. E.
Cauble, & J. M. Patterson (Eds.), Family stress, coping, and social support (pp. 26-47).
Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.
McCullough, L., & Farrell, A. D. (1983). The computerized assessment for psychotherapy evalu-
ation and research. New York: Department of Psychiatry, Beth Israel Medical Center.
McGrath, E., Keita, G. P., Strickland, B. R., & Russo, N. F. (1990). Women and depression: Risk
factors and treatment issues (Final report of the American Psychological Association’s
National Task Force on Women and Depression). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Mechanic, D. (1968). The study of social stress and its relationship to disease. In D. Mechanic
(Ed.), Medical sociology (pp. 294-322). New York: Free Press.
Mechanic, D. (1970). Discussion of research programs on relations between stressful life events
and episodes of physical illness. In B. S. Dohrenwend & B. P. Dohrenwend (Eds.), Stressful
life events (pp. 87-97). New York: Wiley.
Meichenbaum, D., & Asarnow, J. (1979). Cognitive-behavioral modification and metacognitive
development: Implications for the classroom. In P. C. Kendall & S. D. Hollon (Eds.),
Cognitive-behavioral interventions: Theory, research, and procedure (pp. 11-35). New
York: Academic Press.
Meiselman, K. C. (1978). Incest: A psychological study of causes and effects with treatment rec-
ommendations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Meyer, T. J., & Mark, M. M. (1995). Effects of psychosocial interventions with adult cancer
patients: A meta-analysis of randomized experiments. Health Psychology, 14, 101-108.
Miller, M. J., Karriker, C. S., & Pilgreen, J. C. (1984). Personality consistency and perceived
problem-solving behavior and attitudes: An extension of Holland’s typology. Journal of
Employment Counseling, 21, 162-167.
Miller, S. I. (1986). Adult children of alcoholics. Hospital & Community Psychiatry, 37, 235-
236.
Mooney, R. L., & Gordon, L. V. (1950). Manual: The Mooney Problem Checklists. New York:
Psychological Corporation.
Moss, S. (1983). Formal and informal problem solving and age related differences. Unpublished
master’s thesis, University of Missouri, Columbia.
Neal, G. W. (1983). Personal problem solving: Awareness and utilization of campus helping
resources. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia.
Neal, G. W., & Heppner, P. P. (1986). Problem-solving self-appraisal, awareness, and utilization
of campus helping resources. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 33, 39-44.
Neville, H. A., Heppner, P. P., & Wang, L. (1997). Relations among racial identity attitudes, per-
ceived stressors, and coping styles in African American college students. Journal of Coun-
seling and Development, 75, 303-311.

Nezu, A. M. (1985). Differences in psychological distress between effective and ineffective

problem solvers. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32, 135-138.
Nezu, A. M. (1986a). Efficacy of a social problem-solving therapy approach for unipolar depres-
sion. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 54, 196-202.
Nezu, A. M. (1986b). Negative life stress and anxiety: Problem solving as a moderator variable.
Psychological Reports, 58, 279-283.
Nezu, A. M., & Carnevale, G. J. (1987). Interpersonal problem solving and coping reactions of
Vietnam veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 96,
155-157.
Nezu, A., & D’Zurilla, T. J. (1979). An experimental evaluation of the decision-making process
in social problem solving. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 3, 269-277.
Nezu, A. M., Kalmar, K., Ronan, G. F., & Clavijo, A. (1986). Attributional correlates of depres-
sion: An interactional model including problem solving. Behavior Therapy, 17, 50-56.
Nezu, A. M., & Nezu, C. M. (1987). Psychological distress, problem solving, and coping reac-
tions: Sex role differences. Sex Roles, 16, 205-214.
Nezu, A. M., Nezu, C. M., Friedman, S. H., Faddis, S., & Houts, P. S. (1998). Helping cancer
patients cope: A problem-solving approach. Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Nezu, A. M., Nezu, C. M., & Perri, M. G. (1989). Problem-solving therapy for depression: The-
ory, research, and clinical guidelines. New York: Wiley.
Nezu, A. M., Nezu, C. M. Saraydarian, L. Kalmar, K., & Ronan, G. F. (1986). Social problem
solving as a moderating variable between negative life stress and depressive symptoms. Cog-
nitive Therapy and Research, 10, 489-498.
Nezu, A. M., & Perri, M. G. (1989). Social problem-solving therapy for unipolar depression: An
initial dismantling investigation. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57, 408-
413.
Nezu, A. M., Perri, M. G., Nezu, C. M., & Mahoney, D. J. (1987). Social problem solving as a
moderator of stressful events among clinically depressed individuals. Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the Association for the Advancement of Behavior Therapy, Boston.
Nezu, A. M., & Ronan, G. F. (1985). Life stress, current problems, problem solving, and depres-
sive symptoms: An integrative model. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53,
693-697.
Nezu, A. M., & Ronan, G. F. (1988). Social problem solving as a moderator of stress-related
depressive symptoms: A prospective analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 35, 134-
138.
O’Neil, J. M., Helms, B. J., Gable, R. K., David, L., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1986). Gender-Role
Conflict Scale: College men’s fear of femininity. Sex Roles, 14, 335-350.
Perez, R. M., Thoreson, R. W., Patton, M. J., & Heppner, P. P. (1997). Problem-solving
appraisal and narcissism among delinquent adolescents. Journal of Offender Rehabilita-
tion, 26, 19-44.
Peterson, L. (1989). Coping by children undergoing stressful medical procedures: Some concep-
tual, methodological, and therapeutic issues. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
57, 380-387.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral
routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Phillips, S. D., Pazienza, N. J., & Ferrin, H. H. (1984). Decision-making styles and problem-
solving appraisal. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 497-502.
Platt, J. J., & Spivack, G. (1975). Manual for the means-ends problem solving procedure
(MEPS): A measure of interpersonal cognitive problem solving skill. Philadelphia: Depart-
ment of Mental Health Sciences, Hahnemann Medical College and Hospital.

Platt, J. J., Spivack, G., Altman, N., Altman, D., & Peizer, S. B. (1974). Adolescent problem-
solving thinking. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 787-793.
Pretorius, T. (1992). Problem-solving appraisal in the association of life stress and depression: A
South African study. Psychological Reports, 71, 855-862.
Pretorius, T. (1996). The family environment of students self-appraised as effective and ineffec-
tive problem solvers. Psychological Reports, 79, 915-921.
Pretorius, T. B., & Diedricks, M. (1994). Problem-solving appraisal, social support and stress-
depression relationship. South African Journal of Psychology, 24, 86-90.
Pretorius, T., Heyns, P., & Broekmann, N. (1991). The effect of a computer-assisted career guid-
ance system on the career development of South African students. South African Journal of
Priester, M. J., & Clum, G. A. (1993). Perceived problem-solving ability as a predictor of depres-
sion, hopelessness, and suicide ideation in a college population. Journal of Counseling Psy-
chology, 40, 79-85.
Ptacek, J., Smith, R. E., & Zanas, J. (1992). Gender, appraisal, and coping: A longitudinal analy-
sis. Journal of Personality, 60, 747-770.
Rabin, L.A. (2001). Test usage patterns and perceived ecological utility of neuropsychological
assessment techniques: A survey of North American clinical neuropsychologists. Unpub-
lished doctoral dissertation, Fordham University.
Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D Scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general
population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385-401.
Rath, J. F., Hennessy, J. J., & Diller, L. (2003). Social problem solving and community integra-
tion in postacute rehabilitation outpatients with traumatic brain injury. Rehabilitation Psy-
chology, 48, 137-144.
Rath, J. F., Simon, D., Langenbahn, D. M., Sherr, R. L., & Diller, L. (2000). Measurement of
problem-solving deficits in adults with acquired brain damage. Journal of Head Trauma
Rehabilitation, 15, 724-733.
Rath, J. F., Simon, D., Langenbahn, D. M., Sherr, R. L., & Diller, L. (in press). Group treatment of
problem-solving deficits in outpatients with traumatic brain injury: A randomized outcome
study. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation.
Rath, J. F., Langenbahn, D. M., Simon, D., Sherr, R. L., Fletcher, J., & Diller, L. (in press). The
construct of problem solving in higher-level neuropsychological assessment and
rehabilation. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology.
Reeder, B. L., & Heppner, P. P. (1985). Personal problem-solving activities of Black university
students. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 13, 154-163.
Reid, J. K., & Dixon, W. A. (2000). The relationships among grief experience, problem-solving
appraisal, and depression: An exploratory study. Journal of Personal and Interpersonal Loss,
5, 77-93.
Reis, S. D., & Heppner, P. P. (1993). Examination of coping resources and family adaptation in
mothers and daughters of incestuous versus nonclinical families. Journal of Counseling Psy-
chology, 40, 100-108.
Resick, P. A. (2001). Stress and trauma. Philadelphia: Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis.
Rich, A. R., & Bonner, R. L. (1987). Interpersonal moderators of depression among college stu-
dents. Journal of College Student Personnel, 28, 337-342.
Rich, A. R., & Bonner, R. L. (1989). Support for a pluralistic approach to the treatment of depres-
sion. Journal of College Student Development, 30, 426-431.
Ritchey, K. M., Carscaddon, D. M., & Morgan, C. H. (1984). Problem-solving appraisal versus
hypothetical problem solving. Psychological Reports, 55, 815-818.
Roos, P. E., & Cohen, L. H. (1987). Sex roles and social support as moderators of life stress
adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 576-585.

Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforce-
ment. Psychological Monographs, 80, 1-28.
Rowe, H. A. H. (1985). Problem solving and intelligence. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rudd, M., Rajab, M., & Dahm, P. (1994). Problem-solving appraisal in suicide ideators and
attempters. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 64, 136-149.
Rudd, M., Rajab, M., Orman, D. T., Stulman, D. A., Joiner, T., & Dixon, W. (1996). Effectiveness
of an outpatient intervention targeting suicidal young adults: Preliminary results. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 179-190.
Sabourin, S., Laporte, L., & Wright, J. (1990). Problem-solving self-appraisal and coping efforts
in distressed and nondistressed couples. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 16, 89-97.
Sahin, N., Sahin, N. H., & Heppner, P. P. (1993). Psychometric properties of the Problem Solving
Inventory in a group of Turkish university students. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 17,
379-396.
Sarmány, I., & Sládeková, L. (1990). Personality aspects of strategy production in solving the
anticipatory task. Studia Psychologica, 32, 97-106.
Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1985). Optimism, coping, and health: Assessment and implica-
tions of generalized outcome expectancies. Health Psychology, 4, 219-247.
Schlossberg, N. K. (1981). A model for analyzing human adaptation to transition. The Counsel-
ing Psychologist, 9, 2-18.
Schotte, D. E., & Clum, G. A. (1982). Suicide ideation in a college population: A test of a model.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 50, 690-696.
Schotte, D. E., & Clum, G. A. (1987). Problem-solving skills in suicidal psychiatric patients.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55, 49-54.
Selye, H. (1984). The stress of life (Rev. ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Sher, K. J. (1991). Children of alcoholics: A critical appraisal of theory and research. Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press.
Shorkey, C. T., McRoy, R. G., & Armendariz, J. (1985). Intensity of parental punishments and
problem-solving attitudes and behaviors. Psychological Reports, 56, 283-286.
Shure, M. B. (1982). Interpersonal problem solving: A cog in the wheel of social cognition. In
F. C. Serafica (Ed.), Social-cognitive development in context (pp. 133-166). New York:
Guilford.
Shure, M. B., & Spivack, G. (1972). Means-ends thinking, adjustment, and social class among
elementary-school-aged children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 38, 348-
353.
Slavkin, S. L., Heimberg, R. G., Winning, C. D., & McCaffrey, R. J. (1992). Personal and paren-
tal problem drinking: Effects on problem-solving performance and self-appraisal. Addictive
Behaviors, 17, 191-199.
Smith, C. A. (1991). The self, appraisal, and coping. In C. R. Snyder & D. R. Forsyth (Eds.),
Handbook of social and clinical psychology: The healthy perspective (pp. 116-137).
Elmsford, NY: Pergamon.
Snyder, C. R., & Ford, C. E. (1987). Coping with negative life events: Clinical and social psycho-
logical perspectives. New York: Plenum.
Soukup, V. M., Beiler, M. E., & Terrell, F. (1990). Stress, coping style, and problem solving abil-
ity among eating-disordered inpatients. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 46, 592-599.
Spence, J. T. (1991). Do the BSRI and PAQ measure the same or different concepts? Psychology
of Women Quarterly, 15, 141-165.
Spivack, G., & Shure, M. B. (1974). Social adjustment of young children: A cognitive approach
to solving real-life problems. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Stein, R. I., Saelens, B. E., Dounchis, J. Z., Lewczyk, C. M., Swenson, A. K., & Wilfley, D. E.
(2001). Treatment of eating disorders in women. The Counseling Psychologist, 29, 695-732.

Sternberg, R. J. (1982). Reasoning, problem solving, and intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.),

Handbook of human intelligence (pp. 225-307). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Striegel-Moore, R. H., & Cachelin, F. M. (1999). Body image concerns and disordered eating in
adolescent girls: Risk and protective factors. In N. G. Johnson, M. C. Roberts, & J. Worrell
(Eds.), Beyond appearance: A new look at adolescent girls (pp. 85-108). Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Striegel-Moore, R. H., & Cachelin, F. M. (2001). Etiology of eating disorders in women. The
Counseling Psychologist, 29, 635-661.
Striegel-Moore, R. H., Silberstein, L. R., & Rodin, J. (1986). Toward an understanding of risk
factors for bulimia. American Psychologist, 41, 246-263.
Thompson, C. E., & Neville, H. A. (1999). Racism, mental health, and mental health practice.
The Counseling Psychologist, 27, 155-223.
Tommasi, M. (2000). Furthering psychological empowerment theory: A model for the relation
between voluntary participation, problem-solving appraisal and perceived sociopolitical
control. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia.
Tracey, T. J., Sherry, P., & Keitel, M. (1986). Distress and help-seeking as a function of person-
environment fit and self-efficacy: A causal model. American Journal of Community Psychol-
ogy, 14, 657-676.
Urban, H., & Ford, H. (1971). Some historical and conceptual perspectives of psychotherapy and
behavioral change. In A. Bergin & S. Garfield (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and
behavior change (pp. 3-35). New York: Wiley.
Van Vliet, K. (1996). Social problem solving efficacy in women sexually abused in childhood.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wisconsin School of Professional Psychology.
Walker, L. O., & Johnson, L. B. (1986). Preschool children’s socioemotional development;
Endogenous and environmental antecedents in early infancy. (Final report to the Hogg Foun-
dation for Mental Health.).
Wang, L., Heppner, P. P., & Berry, T. R. (1997). Role of gender-related personality traits,
problem-solving appraisal, and perceived social support in developing a mediational model
of psychological adjustment. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 44, 245-255.
Weisz, J. R., Rothbaum, F. M., & Blackburn, T. C. (1984). Standing out and standing in: The psy-
chology of control in America and Japan. American Psychologist, 39, 955-969.
Weitz, H. (1964). Behavior change through guidance. New York: Wiley.
West, M. O., & Prinz, R. J. (1987). Parental alcoholism and childhood psychopathology. Psycho-
logical Bulletin, 102, 204-218.
Wickelgren, W. (1974). How to solve problems. San Francisco: Freeman.
Willer, B., Ottenbacher, K. J., & Coad, M. L. (1994). The community integration questionnaire.
A comparative examination. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 73,
103-111.
Williams, J. G., & Kleinfelter, K. J. (1989). Perceived problem-solving skills and drinking pat-
terns among college students. Psychological Reports, 65, 1235-1244.
Wills, T. A., & Hirky, A. (1996). Coping and substance abuse: A theoretical model and review of
the evidence. In M. Zeidner & N. S. Endler (Eds.), Handbook of coping: Theory, research,
applications (pp. 279-302). New York: Wiley.
Wilson, G. T. (1987). Cognitive studies in alcoholism. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psy-
chology, 55, 325-331.
Witty, T. E., Heppner, P. P., Bernard, C. B., & Thoreson, R. W. (2001). Problem solving appraisal
and psychological adjustment of chronic low back pain patients. Journal of Clinical Psychol-
ogy in Medical Settings, 8, 149-160.
Woititz, J. G. (1985). Struggle for intimacy. Pompa, FL: Health Communications.

Wortman, C. B., Sheedy, C., Gluhoski, V., & Kessler, R. C. (1992). Stress, coping, and health:
Conceptual issues and directions for future research. In H. S. Friedman (Ed.), Hostility, cop-
ing, & health (pp. 227-256). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Wright, D. M., & Heppner, P. P. (1991). Coping among nonclinical college-age children of alco-
holics. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38, 565-572.
Wright, D. M., & Heppner, P. P. (1993). Examining the well-being of non-clinical college stu-
dents: Is knowledge of the presence of parental alcoholism useful? Journal of Counseling
Wright, M. B., Carscaddon, D.M., & Lambert, S. D. (2000). Sex, education, age, and cautious-
ness: Implications for counselors. Adultspan Journal, 2, 113-122.
Zeidner, M., & Endler, N. S. (Eds.). (1996). Handbook of coping: Theory, research, applications.
New York: Wiley.

View publication stats

Problem-Solving Appraisal and Psychological Adjustment: January 2012

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Problem-Solving Appraisal and Psychological Adjustment: January 2012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Problem-Solving Appraisal and Psychological Adjustment

Article · January 2012

Puncky Paul Heppner Dong-Gwi Lee

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Self-Esteem Study View project

Attachment View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

The online version of this article can be found at:

Division of Counseling Psychology of the American Psychological Association

Email Alerts: http://tcp.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Citations (this article cites 61 articles hosted on the

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

Theoretical Conceptualizations of Problem-Solving Appraisal

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

Identify Determinants of Problem-Solving Appraisal

Counselors ought to know something about how people solve problems.

Through personal communication with the first author beginning in 1973,

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

How people respond to difficult life problems is an exceedingly complex

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

OVERVIEW OF PROBLEM-SOLVING APPRAISAL AND THE PSI

Brief History of Applied Problem Solving, Stress, and Health

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

solving hypothetical problems was positively correlated with developing

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

suggested that the appraisal of one’s problem-solving skills might well be an

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

Problem Solving Inventory

Instrument structure. The PSI assesses perceptions of one’s problem-

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

Illustrations. To illustrate the construct of problem-solving appraisal,

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

Construct validity estimates. A range of studies provide a wealth of data

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

Discriminant validity and potential confounds. In terms of discriminant

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

Normative information. The means suggest that clinical populations have

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

Theoretical Conceptualizations of Problem-Solving Appraisal

Although a complete theoretical analysis of applied problem solving and

Person-environment models. Although there is a wide range of theoretical

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

personal resources may vary depending on the magnitude of the environmen-

Generalized expectancies within social learning theory. Heppner and

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

D’Zurilla and colleagues (D’Zurilla, 1986; D’Zurilla & Goldfried, 1971;

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

It has been suggested repeatedly that ineffective problem solving results

General Psychological and Social Adjustment

At least 24 studies have examined relations between problem-solving

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

lem-solving confidence might mediate the relations between such an

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

Twenty-three other studies report significant zero-order correlations

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

Some studies used longitudinal designs to test the moderating effects of

Downloaded from http://tcp.sagepub.com by SJO TEMP on January 24, 2007

Hopelessness and Suicidality