To read this content please select one of the options below:

Cognitive hardiness, appraisal and coping: comparing two transactional models

Melanie L. Cash (Fonterra Co‐operative Group Limited, Auckland, New Zealand)
Dianne Gardner (School of Psychology, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand)

Journal of Managerial Psychology

ISSN: 0268-3946

Article publication date: 8 November 2011




This paper aims to test the relationship of the personality variable of cognitive hardiness to job satisfaction, performance and intention to turnover. These relationships are to be tested via two alternative models, with a sequential and simultaneous structure for appraisal and coping processes.


Employees (n=297) from a range of large New Zealand organisations completed a questionnaire on hardiness, appraisal, coping and affect.


Bivariate correlations revealed significant positive relationships between hardiness and job satisfaction, hardiness and performance, and a significant negative relationship with intention to turnover. Structural equation modelling revealed that the direct positive relationship between hardiness and job satisfaction was the strongest path. The simultaneous model provided best fit to the data, revealing a positive path from hardiness through challenge appraisals to positive affect, and a negative path through threat appraisal and emotion‐focused coping.

Research limitations/implications

Higher levels of hardiness were associated with more positive appraisals and more effective coping responses. However, the cross sectional nature of this research and the use of a single measurement source pose potential limitations in terms of common method variance and study generalisability.


The paper investigates the relationship of hardiness to outcomes such as job satisfaction, self‐rated work performance and intentions to leave and explores the processes that underlie the relationships between hardiness and outcomes.



Cash, M.L. and Gardner, D. (2011), "Cognitive hardiness, appraisal and coping: comparing two transactional models", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 26 No. 8, pp. 646-664.



Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2011, Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Related articles