Balanced Time Perspective Balanced Time Perspective in Britain and Russiain Britain and Russia

Evgeny N. Osin, Ilona Boniwell,Evgeny N. Osin, Ilona Boniwell,P. Alex Linley, Galina V. IvanchenkoP. Alex Linley, Galina V. Ivanchenko

Time Perspective – DefinitionsTime Perspective – Definitions

The totality of the individual’s views of his The totality of the individual’s views of his psychological future and psychological past psychological future and psychological past existing at a given timeexisting at a given time (Lewin, 1951).(Lewin, 1951).

An individual’s cognitive way of relating to An individual’s cognitive way of relating to the psychological concepts of past, present the psychological concepts of past, present and future, which affects decision making and future, which affects decision making and subsequent actionsand subsequent actions (Boniwell, 2005).(Boniwell, 2005).

A cognitive operation that implies both an A cognitive operation that implies both an emotional reaction to imagined time zones emotional reaction to imagined time zones (such as future, present or past) and a (such as future, present or past) and a preference for locating action in some preference for locating action in some temporal zonetemporal zone (Lennings, 1996).(Lennings, 1996).

Measuring Time PerspectiveMeasuring Time Perspective Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory

(ZTPI) includes 5 scales:(ZTPI) includes 5 scales: Past-Negative Past-Negative (PN)(PN) Past-Positive Past-Positive (PP)(PP) Present-Hedonistic Present-Hedonistic (PH)(PH) Present-Fatalistic Present-Fatalistic (PF)(PF) Future Future (F)(F)

Advantages: high reliability, well-Advantages: high reliability, well-established validity.established validity.

Possible issues: heterogeneous Possible issues: heterogeneous scales (PN, PH, F), lack of valence in scales (PN, PH, F), lack of valence in the future scale.the future scale.

TP – Existing FindingsTP – Existing Findings TP influences educational achievement, health, TP influences educational achievement, health,

sleep and dreaming patterns, choice of food, sleep and dreaming patterns, choice of food, romantic partner choices, sexual behaviour, romantic partner choices, sexual behaviour, risk-taking and perceived time pressure.risk-taking and perceived time pressure. Future TP is associated with motivation, sense Future TP is associated with motivation, sense

of responsibility, ability to organise and plan of responsibility, ability to organise and plan actions, self-efficacyactions, self-efficacy..

Present TP is associated with health problems, Present TP is associated with health problems, crime, addictions, dangerous driving and sexual crime, addictions, dangerous driving and sexual promiscuitypromiscuity..

TP (measured using ZTPI) and well-being:TP (measured using ZTPI) and well-being: No association with future TP.No association with future TP. Weak positive associations with PH.Weak positive associations with PH. Moderate positive associations with PP and Moderate positive associations with PP and

negative associations with PN.negative associations with PN.

TP Profiles and Balanced TPTP Profiles and Balanced TP Five hypothetical TP profiles: Five hypothetical TP profiles: hedonistichedonistic, ,

future-orientedfuture-oriented, , balancedbalanced, , risk-takingrisk-taking, and , and fatalisticfatalistic (Boyd & Zimbardo, 2005). (Boyd & Zimbardo, 2005).

““In an optimally balanced time perspective, In an optimally balanced time perspective, the past, present and future components the past, present and future components blend and flexibly engage, depending on a blend and flexibly engage, depending on a situation’s demands and our needs and situation’s demands and our needs and values”values” (Zimbardo, 2005).(Zimbardo, 2005).

Balanced TP (BTP) is operationally defined Balanced TP (BTP) is operationally defined as high scores on PP, PH, and F as high scores on PP, PH, and F associated with low scores on PN and PF.associated with low scores on PN and PF.

Existing operationalisations of BTP based Existing operationalisations of BTP based on percentile cutoff-point criteria (Drake et on percentile cutoff-point criteria (Drake et al., 1998).al., 1998).

Aims of the studiesAims of the studies

1)1) Find out the existence of TP profiles Find out the existence of TP profiles in different cultural settings;in different cultural settings;

2)2) Investigate the association between Investigate the association between TP and hedonic/eudaimonic well-TP and hedonic/eudaimonic well-being;being;

3)3) Evaluate a new operationalisation of Evaluate a new operationalisation of BTP based on person-oriented BTP based on person-oriented approach (Magnusson) and approach (Magnusson) and compare it to the existing compare it to the existing operationalisation.operationalisation.

The UK study (Study 1)The UK study (Study 1)

Undergraduates of the Open University Undergraduates of the Open University (N=179), aged 18 to 58 ((N=179), aged 18 to 58 (M M = 24).= 24).

Instruments:Instruments: Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI: (ZTPI:

Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999);Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999); Temporal Satisfaction with Life Scale Temporal Satisfaction with Life Scale

(TSWLS: Pavot, Diener, & Suh, 1998);(TSWLS: Pavot, Diener, & Suh, 1998); Positive and Negative Affect Scale Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS: (PANAS:

Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988);Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988); Time Competence Scale Time Competence Scale (Shostrom, 1963);(Shostrom, 1963); Measure of the Actualization of Potential Measure of the Actualization of Potential

(MAP: Lefrançois, Leclerc, Dubé, Hébert, & (MAP: Lefrançois, Leclerc, Dubé, Hébert, & Gaulin, 1997).Gaulin, 1997).

TP & WB – AssociationsTP & WB – AssociationsPN PH F PP PF

Time Competence -.58*** .31*** -.21** .34*** -.09

TSWLS: Past -.62*** .31*** -.09 .52*** -.11

TSWLS: Present -.33*** .27*** .03 .32*** -.19*

TSWLS: Future -.34*** .23** .04 .31*** -.24**

Positive Affect -.15* .34*** .15 .18* -.16*

Negative Affect .46*** -.05 .01 -.28*** .22**

MAP -.46*** .45*** -.01 .31*** -.17*

Pearson correlations (N=179) *** p<.001, ** p<.01, * p<.05

TP profilesTP profiles Cluster analysis of standardised ZTPI Cluster analysis of standardised ZTPI

scores (Ward’s method, Squared scores (Ward’s method, Squared Euclidean metric) allowed to Euclidean metric) allowed to distinguish 4 clusters:distinguish 4 clusters: 1) high PH, low F, moderate PF, PP, PN 1) high PH, low F, moderate PF, PP, PN

hedonistichedonistic pattern (32%); pattern (32%); 2) high F, low PH, moderate PN, PP, PF 2) high F, low PH, moderate PN, PP, PF

future-orientedfuture-oriented pattern (32%); pattern (32%); 3) high F and PP, moderate PH, low PN 3) high F and PP, moderate PH, low PN

and PF and PF balancedbalanced pattern (23%); pattern (23%); 4) extremely high PN and PF, extremely 4) extremely high PN and PF, extremely

low PP, moderate PH and F low PP, moderate PH and F negativenegative pattern (12% of the sample).pattern (12% of the sample).

TP profiles and Well-BeingTP profiles and Well-Being

BT P H ED FU T N EGT im e C om petence

TSW LS: PastT SW LS: P resent

T SW LS: FuturePositive Affect

N egative A ffectM AP

-1.0

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

BTP cluster shows the highest well-being scores, followed by hedonistic, future-oriented, and negative clusters. Between-cluster differences are significant (p<.05 and above) for all scales, except PA.

The Russian study (Study 2)The Russian study (Study 2) Undergraduates of several Russian Undergraduates of several Russian

universities in 3 cities (N=289) aged 20 to universities in 3 cities (N=289) aged 20 to 31 (31 (MM = 22). = 22).

Instruments (in Russian language):Instruments (in Russian language): ZTPIZTPI (Russian version by Sircova et al., 2008); (Russian version by Sircova et al., 2008); Subjective Happiness Scale Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS: (SHS:

Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 1999);Lyubomirsky & Lepper, 1999); Satisfaction with Life Scale Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS: Diener et (SWLS: Diener et

al., 1985);al., 1985); Purpose in Life test Purpose in Life test (PIL: Crumbaugh & (PIL: Crumbaugh &

Maholick, 1981);Maholick, 1981); Generalised Self-Efficacy Scale Generalised Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES: (GSES:

Schwarzer, 1993);Schwarzer, 1993); Success and Failure Explanatory Style Success and Failure Explanatory Style

Questionnaire Questionnaire (SFESQ: Gordeeva et al., 2009);(SFESQ: Gordeeva et al., 2009); Balanced Inventory for Desirable Balanced Inventory for Desirable

Responding Responding (BIDR: Paulhus, 1998).(BIDR: Paulhus, 1998).

TP & WB – AssociationsTP & WB – Associations

PN PH F PP PF

Satisfaction With Life -.45*** .05 .14* .21*** -.23***

Subjective Happiness -.51*** .18** .09 .29*** -.22***

Purpose In Life -.46*** .10 .36*** .25*** -.52***

Generalized Self-Efficacy -.26*** .14* .04 .02 -.30***

Optimism -.27*** .20** .28*** .21*** -.27***

Pearson correlations (N=289) *** p<.001, ** p<.01, * p<.05

TP profilesTP profiles 5 TP clusters were found:5 TP clusters were found:

1) high PF, moderate PN, PH, F, PP 1) high PF, moderate PN, PH, F, PP risk-taking pattern (25%) risk-taking pattern (25%)

2) high F and PP, moderate PH, low PN 2) high F and PP, moderate PH, low PN and PF and PF balancedbalanced pattern (10%); pattern (10%);

3) high F, low PH, F, moderate PN, PP 3) high F, low PH, F, moderate PN, PP future-orientedfuture-oriented pattern (23%); pattern (23%);

4) high PH, low F, moderate PF, PP, PN 4) high PH, low F, moderate PF, PP, PN hedonistichedonistic pattern (27%); pattern (27%);

5) extremely high PN, extremely low PP, 5) extremely high PN, extremely low PP, moderate PF, low PH and F moderate PF, low PH and F negativenegative pattern (15%).pattern (15%).

TP profiles and Well-BeingTP profiles and Well-Being

BTP cluster shows the highest well-being scores, followed by hedonistic, future-oriented, risk-taking, and negative clusters. Between-cluster differences significant at p < .001 for all scales.

BT P H ED FU T R IS N EGLife Satis faction

Subjective H appinessPurpose in L ife

O ptim ismSelf-E fficacy

-1.2

-1.0

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

Results SummaryResults Summary

4 conceptually similar TP patterns were 4 conceptually similar TP patterns were found in both samples, with only minor found in both samples, with only minor differences (risk-taking cluster emerged differences (risk-taking cluster emerged only in Russia).only in Russia).

The pattern of association between the TP The pattern of association between the TP clusters and well-being levels was also the clusters and well-being levels was also the same in both countries.same in both countries.

In both countries the BTP cluster In both countries the BTP cluster incorporated most of the BTP group incorporated most of the BTP group selected by percentile cutoff criteria and selected by percentile cutoff criteria and statistically differed more strongly than the statistically differed more strongly than the latter in well-being from the rest of the latter in well-being from the rest of the sample.sample.

Conclusions – TP and WBConclusions – TP and WB

The future orientation is not irrelevant to The future orientation is not irrelevant to WB: it is likely associated with eudaimonic WB: it is likely associated with eudaimonic WB and plays a part in BTP.WB and plays a part in BTP.

The TP patterns proposed by Boyd & The TP patterns proposed by Boyd & Zimbardo (2005) have been discovered Zimbardo (2005) have been discovered empirically.empirically.

Balanced TP is the best-off in terms of WB, Balanced TP is the best-off in terms of WB, compared to future-oriented and hedonistic compared to future-oriented and hedonistic TP profiles.TP profiles.

The cluster-analysis operationalisation of The cluster-analysis operationalisation of BTP seems to be a better option than the BTP seems to be a better option than the percentile cutoff-point approach.percentile cutoff-point approach.

Person-oriented approachPerson-oriented approach

Psychologists study different people, Psychologists study different people, and the mechanisms behind the trait and the mechanisms behind the trait patterns observed in different patterns observed in different individuals are also not the same.individuals are also not the same.

By looking only at the average By looking only at the average picture and failing to investigate the picture and failing to investigate the individual differences in those individual differences in those mechanisms we fail to see them mechanisms we fail to see them clearly, as the example of the clearly, as the example of the association between future TP and association between future TP and well-being shows.well-being shows.

Thank you!Thank you!

Wise Man Studying Time, by Leonardo da VinciPresented by Evgeny Osin (keen-psy@mail.ru). This research was

supported by a Visiting Research Fellowship from the Leverhulme Trust.