After a painful setback, the future can become difficult to picture. We may still know what we want, yet have no idea how to move toward it. Or we may see several possible steps and feel too discouraged to begin. Hope becomes especially meaningful in this space between wanting life to be different and believing that something can be done.

Snyder’s hope theory gives hope a practical shape. A goal provides direction, a possible route makes movement imaginable, and agency helps us take the next step. When circumstances change, the process may involve seeking help, developing another approach, or reconsidering what we are trying to achieve. The usefulness of the theory lies in making these different needs easier to recognize.

What Is Snyder’s Hope Theory

Psychologist Charles Richard Snyder, usually published as C. R. Snyder, and his colleagues developed a model of hope centered on goal pursuit. Their landmark 1991 paper introduced a measure of agency and pathways thinking. Snyder’s 1994 book, The Psychology of Hope, brought the framework to a wider audience through research, clinical examples, and suggestions for nurturing hope (Snyder et al., 1991; Snyder, 1994).

The model distinguishes wanting an outcome from perceiving a workable way to pursue it. Someone may deeply want to return to school while doubting both their ability to manage the work and their access to a feasible program. Another person may have a detailed study plan but little motivation to follow it. Snyder’s framework directs attention to how planning and motivation work together around a meaningful goal.

How Hope Theory Works

Goals Give Hope a Direction

In Snyder’s model, goals are outcomes we value and imagine pursuing. They can involve gaining something, maintaining something important, or preventing an unwanted outcome. A goal might be completing a qualification, preserving contact with a friend, or finding a safer living arrangement. Hope becomes relevant where the outcome matters and some uncertainty remains (Snyder, 1994).

“I want things to get better” can express a real need while leaving the next action unclear. Naming a more specific goal, such as arranging one conversation about financial assistance, makes it easier to consider possible routes. The immediate goal can be modest even when the larger concern is enormous. Its value comes partly from fitting the person’s actual circumstances.

A meaningful goal also needs room for judgment. We may want a particular person to love us, an illness to disappear, or a family member to stop using drugs. The strength of that desire does not place the outcome under our control. In applying hope theory, it helps to distinguish the outcome we long for from the actions we can reasonably influence. Supporting a loved one and protecting our own stability are possible directions even when their choices remain their own.

Pathways Thinking Helps Us Find Possible Routes

Snyder called the planning side of hope waypower. In research, it is usually described as pathways thinking: perceiving that we can generate routes toward a desired goal. This includes considering alternatives when the first approach becomes blocked. A person can be highly determined and still need better information or a different strategy (Snyder, 1994).

Consider someone who wants to return to education after years away. A full-time program may be their first imagined route. If that proves impractical, they might investigate a single course, part-time study, or a different qualification. Each option requires information about entry requirements, cost, and time. Listing possible routes is a beginning; it does not establish that they are accessible.

Pathways thinking can include finding someone who knows more than we do. Snyder explicitly included asking for help among his suggestions for developing waypower. For the prospective student, an adviser might clarify a route that was difficult to identify alone (Snyder, 1994, pp. 253–254).

Agency Thinking Helps Us Begin and Continue

Agency is the motivational side of Snyder’s model. He used willpower to describe the sense of determination that helps a person initiate and sustain movement toward a goal. Here, the term refers to goal-directed motivation rather than a general measure of moral strength. Agency and pathways thinking are meant to work together; enthusiasm without a route and planning without movement each leave something missing (Snyder, 1994).

Remembering a previous occasion when we managed difficulty can sometimes make another attempt seem possible. The useful memory need not involve a dramatic victory. It may be the time we asked for guidance, learned an unfamiliar task, or returned after an interruption. Such experiences can support a believable next step: “I can make this call and see what I learn.” Snyder suggests recalling earlier successes as one way of rekindling determination; this does not promise that the larger problem will resolve (Snyder, 1994, p. 227).

How Progress and Emotion Shape the Next Attempt

Pathways and agency influence one another as a pursuit unfolds. Seeing a plausible route may make action feel more worthwhile, while renewed determination may lead us to search for another route. Snyder describes these processes as iterative: we return to planning and motivation repeatedly as conditions change (Snyder, 2002).

Emotion participates in this process. Imagine that the prospective student completes an introductory assignment and begins to feel more encouraged. That perceived progress may strengthen their willingness to continue. A rejected application may instead bring disappointment and uncertainty about the next route. In Snyder’s model, interpretations of progress and the accompanying emotions feed back into later goal-directed thought (Snyder, 2002).

This is an account of relationships within the theory, not an instruction to turn every unpleasant feeling into motivation. Discouragement may invite a closer look at what happened, and sometimes that look reveals a need for rest, help, or a different aim. A painful response to disappointment does not by itself show that someone lacks hope.

Hope Optimism and Self Efficacy

Hope and Optimism

Optimism generally concerns favorable expectations about the future. Snyder’s hope framework gives particular attention to routes and the motivation to use them. These ideas overlap: an optimistic person may also plan carefully and act persistently. The distinction does not justify treating optimism as foolishness. It identifies two further questions about a desired outcome: how we might reach it and how we might motivate ourselves to begin (Snyder, 1994).

Hope and Self Efficacy

Albert Bandura’s concept of self-efficacy concerns a person’s belief that they can perform the actions a situation requires. He distinguished this capability judgment from expecting that an action will produce a desired result. A student might believe that extra study would help while doubting their ability to study effectively. Self-efficacy helps explain that hesitation (Bandura, 1977).

Hope theory approaches the same student through the combination of a valued goal, perceived routes, and motivation. Tutoring might provide a new route; learning a study method might strengthen the judgment of capability; a manageable first assignment might make further effort more believable. These constructs can inform one another without being interchangeable. Neither a capability belief nor a hopeful outlook establishes that external conditions will cooperate.

Research on Hope Theory and Its Limits

Measuring Hope

The original adult Hope Scale asks people about their determination to pursue goals and their ability to find ways forward. Some questions contribute to the hope score; others are filler questions. In the development studies, scores showed reasonable consistency across questions and over time, and were related to some goal-directed activities. The scale gave researchers a way to study Snyder’s ideas through people’s reports of how they approach goals (Snyder et al., 1991).

Researchers also distinguish a person’s general hopeful orientation from hope in the present situation. Someone who usually sees possibilities can feel unable to identify a route through a particular loss. A questionnaire describes selected beliefs at a particular level of generality; it does not measure a person’s worth or establish what opportunities are objectively available (Snyder, 2002).

Associations and Intervention Evidence

Snyder’s review described associations between higher hope and favorable outcomes in areas including academic functioning and psychological adjustment. These findings support studying hope as a potentially useful resource. An association alone cannot show that hope caused the outcome: success and support can also strengthen hope, and circumstances may contribute to both (Snyder, 2002).

Can efforts to strengthen hope make a difference? A 2011 review by Robert Weis and Elena Speridakos brought together 27 studies involving 2,154 participants. Across the studies, these approaches were associated with small improvements in reported hope and life satisfaction. They did not show a statistically reliable overall reduction in psychological distress. The studies used different designs and measures, and the authors found signs that studies with favorable results may have been more likely to appear in the published literature. This older review offers modest support for efforts to strengthen hope; it does not establish them as effective treatments for depression or anxiety (Weis & Speridakos, 2011).

How Other People Help Make Hope Possible

A helpful response can change more than how encouraged we feel. In their review of thriving through relationships, Brooke Feeney and Nancy Collins describe social support that provides comfort during adversity and support that helps a person explore opportunities. Practical assistance, help developing relevant abilities, and a dependable relationship are among the proposed ways others can contribute (Feeney & Collins, 2015).

Applied to hope theory, this means distinguishing encouragement from assistance that makes a route usable. The prospective student might need help understanding an application, arranging childcare, or finding financial assistance. Someone saying “You can do it” may be welcome, but discovering an affordable course changes the options themselves. This example illustrates how support might matter; it is not a finding from a study of this particular student (Snyder, 1994; Feeney & Collins, 2015).

The quality of support matters as well. Feeney and Collins describe how intrusive, controlling, or poorly matched help can undermine the person it is intended to assist. Supporting hope therefore includes listening to what the person values and what help they actually want. Their relational framework does not establish that support guarantees recovery or that every barrier can be solved within a close relationship (Feeney & Collins, 2015).

When Hope Requires Changing the Goal

Persistence has a place in hope, but continuing indefinitely with an unattainable goal can consume resources needed elsewhere. Snyder advised finding a substitute goal when the original was firmly blocked. More recent research on goal adjustment provides a broader framework for considering when to modify a pursuit, disengage from it, or invest in another direction (Snyder, 1994; Riddell et al., 2026).

Riddell and colleagues brought together 235 studies of how people adjust their goals. Letting go of a goal was associated with less distress, while taking up another goal was associated with both less distress and greater well-being. The authors judged the overall evidence to be low to moderate in strength. Many studies measured people at one point in time, making cause and effect difficult to establish; findings also varied, and publication bias remained a concern. This research examines goal adjustment rather than hope theory itself, but it gives us reason to question whether continuing with the same goal is always the healthiest response (Riddell et al., 2026).

For someone living with a lasting limitation, the original goal may need to change while the underlying value remains important. A valued career might give way to another form of contribution; an expectation of reconciliation might give way to building a safer life. These changes can carry real grief. Calling them hopeful should leave room for that loss, as well as uncertainty about what comes next.

Applying Hope Theory in Everyday Life

Clarify the Part You Can Influence

A useful beginning is to name a goal that matters and identify an action connected to it. For the person considering education, “I will be accepted into this program” depends partly on other people’s decisions. “I will ask an adviser whether I meet the requirements” identifies an action they can take. Clearer goals and smaller steps make possible routes easier to examine (Snyder, 1994, pp. 241–244).

Recognize Where Hopeful Action Is Getting Stuck

Snyder’s distinction between pathways and agency suggests that different difficulties may call for different questions. The following questions also consider available support and the possibility of changing a goal. They are a way of reflecting on a situation, not a diagnostic tool or a tested sequence (Snyder, 2002; Feeney & Collins, 2015; Riddell et al., 2026).

• When I want to continue but cannot see a route: What information, alternative approach, or practical help is missing? The prospective student may need someone to explain entry requirements before deciding whether further effort makes sense.
• When I can describe several routes but cannot begin: What makes the first step difficult, and do I still want to pursue this goal? The pattern identifies a question about motivation; it cannot tell us whether the difficulty comes from uncertainty, exhaustion, competing demands, or something else.
• When I have a plan and motivation but the opportunity is unavailable: What condition would need to change? If a required course is full or unaffordable, greater determination alone does not create a place. Assistance, another institution, or a later intake may need investigation.
• When I keep investing in a goal that circumstances have fundamentally changed: Is another route still reasonable, or does the aim itself need reconsideration? Difficulty alone does not answer that question. The remaining possibilities, costs, and importance of the goal need to be considered together.

Develop a Route That Fits Your Circumstances

Write down a workable plan and consider where it might become blocked. Then investigate an alternative or identify someone who can help assess it. The prospective student might compare a full program with a single course and ask about financial support before committing. This uses Snyder’s suggestions about subgoals and help-seeking to make the next inquiry concrete (Snyder, 1994, pp. 241–244, 253–254).

Make Room for Feedback and Revision

Break a distant goal into a manageable next step and review what happens. Did the adviser’s response clarify a requirement? Is a new skill needed, or is the proposed timetable impractical? Snyder’s discussion of subgoals provides one basis for this approach (Snyder, 1994, pp. 241–244). A setback can then be examined for the information it provides, without making one outcome a verdict on the whole person.

Research on regulatory flexibility provides a related perspective. George Bonanno and Charles Burton emphasize noticing what a situation requires, having more than one response available, and learning from what happens when we try. Their framework encourages us to consider whether an approach fits the circumstances. It concerns coping and emotion regulation rather than hope specifically; applying it here offers another way to think about when to persist and when to revise a plan (Bonanno & Burton, 2013).

Brené Brown’s discussion in The Gifts of Imperfection makes an accessible connection between hope and tolerating the frustrations of worthwhile effort. Drawing on Snyder, she describes flexibility, persistence, and the belief that we can participate in pursuing our goals. She also questions the expectation that worthwhile endeavors should always be quick and easy. This is an interpretation of hope for everyday life, rather than a separate experimental test of the theory (Brown, 2010).

These applications leave room for limits on personal influence. A route that requires unavailable money, permission, or safety cannot be made available simply by thinking differently. Agency should never be used to assign someone responsibility for another person’s harmful behavior. A hopeful response can include seeking protection or assistance while acknowledging what remains outside personal control.

A Personal Experience of Recovering Hope

During the latter months of 2008, my life felt as though it had collapsed. Lost dreams occupied my waking thoughts. I began reading and experimenting with meditation, searching for something that might help. Then, briefly, I experienced a moment of peace. It lasted only seconds, but it showed me that my distress did not fill every possible moment of experience.

That experience mattered because it made further searching feel worthwhile. I cannot know how much of my recovery came from reading, meditation, help, the passage of time, or their combination. My experience offers no way to separate those influences. Looking back through Snyder’s framework, however, I recognize a change in what seemed possible. A small experience of relief gave me reason to keep exploring ways forward.

A Few Words by Psychology Fanatic

After a setback, we may be able to see only a little of the future. The demand to feel hopeful can become another burden when what we need is time, companionship, or help with the problem in front of us. There is room to begin with uncertainty and to let another person help us consider what remains possible.

Hope theory invites us to look carefully at the distance between a valued possibility and the life we are living. Sometimes a next step becomes visible. Sometimes we discover that the destination must change. We can acknowledge the disappointment and still allow ourselves to ask, with whatever support is available, where we might go from here.

Associated Concepts

• Self-Efficacy: A person’s belief in their ability to perform particular actions. It helps clarify how confidence in a capability relates to hopeful goal pursuit.
• Goal Setting Theory: A framework explaining how goals direct attention and effort. It offers a related perspective on what gives a pursuit direction.
• Broaden and Build Theory: A theory proposing that positive emotions can widen thought and action and help build enduring resources. It offers a complementary perspective to Snyder’s emphasis on goal-directed thinking.
• Goal Adjustment: Modifying, releasing, or replacing a goal when circumstances change. This perspective helps explain how hope can involve reconsidering a destination while preserving what matters beneath it.
• Social Support Theory: A framework examining how relationships provide emotional comfort, useful information, and practical assistance. Such support may strengthen motivation and make possible routes toward a goal more accessible.
• Regulatory Flexibility: The capacity to consider situational demands, draw on different responses, and adjust through feedback. It complements hope theory by helping explain when persistence, another approach, or a pause may fit the circumstances.

References

Bandura, Albert (1977). Self-Efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191.
(Return to Main Text)

Bonanno, George A.; Burton, Charles L. (2013). Regulatory Flexibility: An Individual Differences Perspective on Coping and Emotion Regulation. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(6), 591–612. DOI: 10.1177/1745691613504116.
(Return to Main Text)

Brown, Brené (2010). The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You’re Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are. Hazelden Publishing. ISBN: 9781592858491.
(Return to Main Text)

Feeney, Brooke C.; Collins, Nancy L. (2015). A New Look at Social Support: A Theoretical Perspective on Thriving Through Relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19(2), 113–147. DOI: 10.1177/1088868314544222.
(Return to Main Text)

Riddell, Hugh; Sedikides, Constantine; Sivaramakrishnan, Hamsini; Wan, Phoebe; Maltagliati, Silvio; Jackson, Ben; Thøgersen-Ntoumani, Cecilie; Gucciardi, Daniel F.; Ntoumanis, Nikos (2026). A Meta-Analytic Review and Conceptual Model of the Antecedents and Outcomes of Goal Adjustment in Response to Striving Difficulties. Nature Human Behaviour, 10, 317–332. DOI: 10.1038/s41562-025-02312-4.
(Return to Main Text)

Snyder, Charles Richard (1994). The Psychology of Hope: You Can Get There from Here. Free Press. ISBN: 9780029297155.
(Return to Main Text)

Snyder, Charles Richard (2002). Hope Theory: Rainbows in the Mind. Psychological Inquiry, 13(4), 249–275. DOI: 10.1207/S15327965PLI1304_01.
(Return to Main Text)

Snyder, Charles Richard; Harris, Cheri; Anderson, John R.; Holleran, Sharon A.; Irving, Lori M.; Sigmon, Sandra T.; Yoshinobu, Lauren; Gibb, June; Langelle, Charyle; Harney, Pat (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. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.60.4.570.
(Return to Main Text)

Weis, Robert; Speridakos, Elena 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. DOI: 10.1186/2211-1522-1-5.
(Return to Main Text)