Social work theory · Volume E: Strengths, Agency & Meaning

Hope theory

Hope theory, developed by C. R. Snyder, defines hope as a way of thinking that combines agency (the determination to reach goals) and pathways (the ability to plan routes to them).

Type: psychological (cognitive-motivational) theory from positive psychology, with associated measures and a practice method (hope therapy).

1. What it is

Hope theory, developed by C. R. Snyder, defines hope as a cognitive set based on a sense of successful goal-directed determination (agency) and planning of ways to meet goals (pathways) (Snyder et al., 1991). In Snyder’s account, hope is primarily a way of thinking about goals. Emotions follow from this thinking: people feel positive when they perceive progress towards goals and negative when they perceive barriers they cannot overcome (Snyder, 2002). Hope is therefore something that can be assessed, learned and strengthened. For social work, hope theory gives precise content to a concept that practitioners have long treated as central to change, and it links closely to the strengths perspective (E1), resilience (E3) and recovery (E8).

Goals. Goals are the anchors of hope theory. They are the mental targets of human action and can be short- or long-term, approach-oriented (reaching a desired outcome) or avoidance-oriented (preventing an unwanted one) (Snyder, 2002). For hope to operate, goals must be valued and must have some uncertainty of attainment. Goals that are certain or impossible do not require hope.

Pathways thinking. Pathways thinking is the perceived capacity to generate workable routes to desired goals. High-hope people tend to produce several routes and to find alternatives when a route is blocked (Snyder, 2002). Pathways thinking is often expressed in self-talk such as “I’ll find a way to get this done”.

Agency thinking. Agency thinking is the perceived capacity to start and sustain movement along a pathway. It is the motivational component of hope, expressed in self-talk such as “I can do this” or “I am not going to give up” (Snyder, 2002). Agency is particularly important when barriers arise, because it supplies the motivation to use alternative pathways.

The interaction of pathways and agency. Snyder (2002) described pathways and agency as additive, reciprocal and positively related, although they are not synonymous. Both are needed for high hope. A person with many ideas but little motivation, or strong motivation but no plan, will struggle to reach goals.

The Hope Scale. Snyder et al. (1991) developed the Adult Dispositional Hope Scale (often called the Trait Hope Scale) to measure hope as a relatively stable disposition. It has twelve items: four measuring agency, four measuring pathways and four fillers. Related measures include the State Hope Scale, which assesses hope in the present moment (Snyder et al., 1996), and the six-item Children’s Hope Scale for ages 8–16 (Snyder et al., 1997). These measures have been used widely in research on health, education, sport and mental health.

Hope and related constructs. Hope overlaps with optimism and self-efficacy but is distinct from them. Optimism is a generalised expectation of good outcomes, while hope includes the person’s own role in producing outcomes through pathways and agency. Self-efficacy focuses on capacity to perform specific behaviours (Snyder, 2002). Bryant and Cvengros (2004) found that hope and optimism are related but empirically separable.

2. Historical development

Snyder’s hope theory grew from earlier psychiatric and psychological interest in hope as a factor in recovery. Stotland (1969) defined hope as an expectation of achieving a goal, mediated by the importance of the goal. Snyder developed his theory in the late 1980s from research on how people explain and cope with failure. He concluded that people who sustained effort despite setbacks combined a sense of will with a sense of ways (Snyder et al., 1991). This cognitive model allowed hope to be measured and studied experimentally, which separated it from philosophical and theological accounts.

Hope theory became a core part of positive psychology in the late 1990s and 2000s (Snyder & Lopez, 2002). Hope therapy, which teaches goal setting, pathways generation and agency enhancement, was tested in community samples (Cheavens et al., 2006). A meta-analysis found modest effects of hope-enhancement strategies on hope and life satisfaction (Weis & Speridakos, 2011). In social work, hope theory has informed strengths-based and recovery-oriented practice, and hope is one of the five CHIME processes of personal recovery (E8).

3. Practical guidance

Hope theory offers a structured way to build hope with clients.

• Help people set clear goals. Work with the person to identify valued, specific and achievable goals. Break long-term goals into sub-goals so that progress is visible (Snyder, 2002).
• Generate several pathways. Brainstorm multiple routes to each goal, and plan in advance what to do if one is blocked. This builds pathways thinking.
• Strengthen agency. Recall past successes, identify sources of motivation and use encouraging self-talk. Progress on small goals strengthens agency for larger ones.
• Reframe barriers. Treat obstacles as problems to be solved and explore alternatives. Ask “what else could you try?” when a plan stalls.
• Assess hope. Use the Adult Hope Scale or Children’s Hope Scale to identify whether a person’s difficulty lies more in pathways or agency, and to track change (Snyder et al., 1991, 1997).
• Hold hope for the person. Where a person’s own hope is low, the worker’s belief in their capacity can sustain the work until their agency returns.
• Recognise structural barriers. Some barriers, such as discrimination or lack of housing, are not overcome by individual pathways thinking. Pair hope work with advocacy.

4. Critical evaluation

Strengths. Hope theory offers a clear, operational definition of a concept central to helping. Its measures are brief, reliable and widely validated, and hope scores predict outcomes in academic achievement, health and coping (Snyder, 2002). The theory translates directly into practice through goal setting, pathways planning and agency building, and it fits well with strengths-based and recovery-oriented work.

Limitations. The theory defines hope in largely cognitive and individual terms. Critics argue that this neglects spiritual, relational and collective forms of hope, and the hope people hold when goals are blocked by forces beyond their control. The overlap between hope, optimism and self-efficacy has been debated (Bryant & Cvengros, 2004). Most research uses self-report measures in Western samples. In social work, an individual focus on hope may underplay how poverty, racism and exclusion constrain the pathways available to people.

Overall importance. Snyder’s hope theory gives practitioners a precise and practical framework for understanding and building hope. It contributes to goal-focused, strengths-based and recovery-oriented practice. Its value is greatest when combined with attention to relationships, culture and the social conditions that open or close pathways.

5. References

• Bryant, F. B., & Cvengros, J. A. (2004). Distinguishing hope and optimism: Two sides of a coin, or two separate coins? Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23(2), 273–302. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.23.2.273.31018
• Cheavens, J. S., Feldman, D. B., Gum, A., Michael, S. T., & Snyder, C. R. (2006). Hope therapy in a community sample: A pilot investigation. Social Indicators Research, 77(1), 61–78.
• Menninger, K. (1959). The academic lecture: Hope. American Journal of Psychiatry, 116(6), 481–491.
• Snyder, C. R. (1994). The psychology of hope: You can get there from here. Free Press.
• Snyder, C. R. (Ed.). (2000). Handbook of hope: Theory, measures, and applications. Academic Press.
• Snyder, C. R. (2002). Hope theory: Rainbows in the mind. Psychological Inquiry, 13(4), 249–275. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1304_01
• Snyder, C. R., Harris, C., Anderson, J. R., Holleran, S. A., Irving, L. M., Sigmon, S. T., Yoshinobu, L., Gibb, J., Langelle, C., & Harney, P. (1991). The will and the ways: Development and validation of an individual-differences measure of hope. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(4), 570–585. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.4.570
• Snyder, C. R., Hoza, B., Pelham, W. E., Rapoff, M., Ware, L., Danovsky, M., Highberger, L., Rubinstein, H., & Stahl, K. J. (1997). The development and validation of the Children’s Hope Scale. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 22(3), 399–421. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/22.3.399
• Snyder, C. R., & Lopez, S. J. (Eds.). (2002). Handbook of positive psychology. Oxford University Press.
• Snyder, C. R., Sympson, S. C., Ybasco, F. C., Borders, T. F., Babyak, M. A., & Higgins, R. L. (1996). Development and validation of the State Hope Scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(2), 321–335. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.2.321
• Stotland, E. (1969). The psychology of hope. Jossey-Bass.
• Weis, R., & Speridakos, E. C. (2011). A meta-analysis of hope enhancement strategies in clinical and community settings. Psychology of Well-Being: Theory, Research and Practice, 1, Article 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/2211-1522-1-5