Measurement of Time Perspective

There have been several attempts to develop a measuring instrument of TP on the basis of combination of past, present, and future orientations. These endeavors have included, among others, the Circles Test (Cottle, 1976), Time Structure Questionnaire (Bond & Feather, 1988), and Time Lines (Rappaport, 1990). However, the majority of these instruments exhibited low reliability and scoring difficulties and measured only one or two temporal regions, with the past TP being largely ignored (Kazakina, 1999). The Stanford Time Perspective Inventory (STPI), developed by Zimbardo (1992), included five predominant orientations: past regret orientation future achievement orientation, two types of present orientation—hedonistic and fatalistic—and time press factor. However, this factor structure proved to be relatively unstable with subsequent factor analyses yielding four, five, or seven factors (Lennings, 2000a, 2000b).

The Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI) is the latest modification of the STPI, which has addressed the shortcomings of the previous scales (Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999). This single, integrated scale for measuring TP has suitable psychometric properties and is reliable, valid, and easy to use. Five main factors underlie this empirically derived factor structure: Future, Past-Positive, Past-Negative, Present-Hedonistic, and Present-Fatalistic. These factors were derived from an extensive series of exploratory studies (including interviews, focus groups, feedback from participants, theoretical consideration, and others) and have been continuously empirically refined for more than a decade (Gonzalez & Zimbardo, 1985; Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999; Zimbardo & Gonzalez, 1984). Essentially, the scale provides a profile of relative values on each of these five factors for individuals or, when aggregated, for groups. The same factor structure has emerged from recent translations and replications with French, German, and Turkish samples. In practice, researchers typically highlight and compare individuals whose TP biases mark them as very high on one of these factors and low on others.

The ZTPI consists of 56 items that are assessed on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from very uncharacteristic (1) to very characteristic (5) of the respondent. A consistent 5-factor structure was revealed through exploratory principal component factor analysis and further supported by confirmatory factor analysis. Thirty-six percent of the total variance is explained by these factors. The ZTPI was demonstrated to have high test-retest reliability, ranging from 0.70 to 0.80 for the different factors (Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999). The convergent and discriminant validity of the instrument was established through predicted correlational patterns of each of the five factors with measures of aggression, depression, conscientiousness, ego-control, impulse control, state-trait anxiety, self-esteem, preference for consistency, reward dependence, sensation seeking, novelty seeking, and consideration of future consequences. The results confirmed associations between individual factors of the ZTPI and predicted scales in combination with low associations with inappropriate scale constructs. For example, the Present-Hedonistic factor was found to be associated with a lack of consideration of future consequences, a low preference for consistency, low ego, or impulse control, but very high interest in novelty and sensation seeking, as well as not correlating with any past- or future-oriented constructs. To ensure that ZTPI items are not reflecting the same underlying dimensions as the preceding psychological constructs, Zimbardo and Boyd (1999) carried out further tests of discriminant validity by examining robust correlations between depression and conscientiousness with Past-Negative and Future ZTPI factors. It was concluded that despite significant correlations between these two pairs of constructs, they remain distinct and not entirely overlapping.

Time Perspective Profiles and Findings From Time Perspective Research

A brief overview of features found to be characteristic of individuals who reveal a dominant bias on each of the five TP factors may help put substance on these conceptual bones. It should be clear that each of these factors may have some personal value to given individuals in particular contexts, but when they come to be an excessive orientation that excludes or minimizes the others, they may become dysfunctional.

Items on the Future TP scale include, among others: “I am able to resist temptations when I know that there is work to be done” and “When I want to achieve something, I set goals and consider specific means for reaching those goals.” The future-oriented person always has an eye toward consequences, contingencies, and probable outcomes of present decisions and actions. He or she is dedicated to working for future goals and their attendant rewards, often at the expense of present enjoyment, delaying gratification, and avoiding time-wasting temptations. Such individuals live in a world of cognitive abstraction, suppressing the reality of the present for the imagined reality of an idealized future world. At micro levels of behavior, they differ from those in other TP categories by being more likely to floss their teeth, eat healthful foods regardless of flavor, get medical checkups regularly, and solve puzzles well. They tend to be more successful than others, both academically and in their careers. The third little pig who built his house from bricks, estimating the possible dangers and uncertainties of a wolf-filled future instead of partying with his quick-and-easy, straw-house-building brother, was surely a future-oriented pig. The downside of excessive future orientation is minimizing the need for social connections, not taking time for occasional self-indulgence, and not being grounded in a sense of community and cultural traditions.

The Past TP is associated with focus on family, tradition, continuity of self over time, and a focus on history. This can be either positive or negative. The Past-Positive TP reflects a warm, pleasurable, often sentimental and nostalgic view of the person's past with emphasis on maintaining relationships with family and friends. These individuals have the highest sense of self-esteem and happiness of those dominant on the other factors. The Past-Positive scale contains items such as: “It gives me pleasure to think about my past” and “I get nostalgic about my childhood.” The Past-Negative TP is characterized by items such as: “I often think of what I should have done differently in my life” and is associated with focusing on personal experiences that were aversive or noxious. In general, a past orientation has the downside of being excessively conservative, cautious, avoiding change and openness to new experiences and cultures, and sustaining the status quo even when it is not in the person's best interest.

A body of research marks present-oriented individuals living in Western societies as at risk for failure of all kinds. The ZTPI distinguishes between two very different ways of being focused on the present. The Present-Hedonistic person lives in the moment, values hedonistic pleasures, enjoys high-intensity activities, seeks thrills and new sensations, and is open to friendships and sexual adventures. He or she would score highly on items such as: “It is important to put excitement in my life.” That kind of person acts with little concern for the consequences of his or her actions by avoiding cost-benefit analyses and contingency planning. Indeed, all of us were such creatures as infants and children, who are essentially biologically driven, their behavior determined by physical needs, emotions, strong situational stimuli, and social input. Life is about seeking pleasure and avoiding pain. The downside of this orientation is that behavior does have consequences, as behaviorist B. F. Skinner taught us so well. Present-Hedonists are at risk for succumbing to the temptations leading to virtually all addictions, for accidents and injuries, and for academic and career failure.

The Present-Fatalistic TP, on the other hand, is associated with hopelessness and immutable beliefs that outside forces control the person's life, such as spiritual or governmental forces. It may be a rather realistic orientation for those living in poverty in ghettoes or refugee camps. It is not uncommon for the parents of poor children—living the hedonistic life—to become fatalistically resigned to be helpless in changing or improving the quality of their life. This TP orientation is expressed by statements such as: “Because whatever will be will be, it doesn't really matter what I do” and “My life path is controlled by forces I cannot influence.”

Zimbardo and Boyd (1999) demonstrate that both Past-Negative and Present-Fatalistic perspectives are associated with strong feelings of depression, anxiety, anger, and aggression. Such temporal perspectives create a negative self-image that handicaps attempts at constructive actions. Even though they may be reality-based in their origin, it is their maintenance and elevation to dominance in an individual's temporal hierarchy that makes them dysfunctional and nonadaptive among middle-class high school and college students functioning in schools in the United States.

The TP construct has been found to be related to many attitudes, values, and status variables, such as educational achievement, health, sleep and dreaming patterns, and romantic partner choices. It is also predictive for a wide range of behaviors, including risky driving and other forms of risk taking, delinquency, and sexual behaviors (Zimbardo, Keough, & Boyd, 1997), as well as abuse of alcohol and drugs (Keough, Zimbardo, & Boyd, 1999). Furthermore, it appears that scores on the ZTPI factors are indicative of choice of food, health choices, parental marital state, desire to spend time with friends, and perceived time pressure, among other factors. For a full depiction of the role of TP in health and risk taking, see Boyd and Zimbardo (in press). It even predicts the extent to which unemployed people living in shelters use their time constructively to seek jobs (future-oriented) or waste time watching TV and engaging in other noninstrumental activities and avoidant coping strategies (present-oriented; Epel, Bandura, & Zimbardo, 1999).

Extension of such research data on individuals to the role of TP among nations and cultures is obviously more sociological, historical, and epidemiological, but they reveal some fascinating patterns. Protestant nations tend to be more future-oriented than Catholic nations (due to the enduring legacy of the Calvinistic focus on earthly success as an indicator of being chosen for heavenly rewards). In turn, the gross national product indexes are higher among Protestant than Catholic nations. Within countries, those living in southern sections tend to be more present-oriented than those in northern regions above the equator. Cultures with more individualistic focus tend to be more future-oriented than those emphasizing collectivism. Western ways of life have become predominantly goal-focused and future-oriented in the service of capitalist values. The new trend toward globalization implicitly promotes a future-oriented market economy of the major industrial nations on developing nations that have been more present- or past-oriented.

However, an excessive emphasis on any given TP type at the expense of the other orientations leads to an imbalance that may not be optimal for individuals nor ideal in the long run for nations. There are costs and sacrifices associated with valuing achievement-oriented, workaholic, future TP traits over and above personal indulgences and civic and social engagement. Westerners are now spending less time on the following vital activities: family, friends, churchgoing, recreation, hobbies, and even household chores (Myers, 2000; see also, Myers, Chapter 41, this volume).

It looks as though Puritan values, recapitulated in “Waste of time is the first and in principle the deadliest of sins” (Weber, 1930/1992, p. 157), have finally won the game of modern life—with a minor drawback of God heading the list of time-wasters. The rituals and narratives essential to a sense of family, community, and nation are endangered and undermined, together with a sense of personal identity, by those living such totally work-focused lives.

Balanced Time Perspective

The ideal of a balanced time perspective comes into play as a more positive alternative to living life as a slave to any particular temporal bias. A blend of temporal orientations can be considered as the most adaptive, depending on external circumstances and optimal in terms of psychological and physiological health. The construct of Balanced Time Perspective (BTP) was initially proposed by Zimbardo and Boyd (1999) at the time of the introduction of the final version of Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI). “In an optimally balanced time perspective, the past, present, and future components blend and flexibly engage, depending on a situation's demands and our needs and values” (Zimbardo, 2002, p. 62).

People with a balanced TP are capable of operating in a temporal mode appropriate to the situation in which they find themselves. When they spend time with their families and friends, they are fully with them and value the opportunity to share a common past. When they take a day off work, they get involved in recreation rather than feel guilty about the work they haven't done. However, when working and studying, they may well put on their more appropriate future TP hat and work more productively. Indeed, when work is to be done and valued, the balanced TP person may get into the flow of enjoying being productive and creative—a present-hedonistic state for a future-focused activity. That is when work becomes play as the worker becomes engaged with the process of the activity and not only with a focus on the product of his or her labors.

Flexibility and “switch-ability” are essential components of a balanced TP, in our view. “The optimal time perspective depends upon the demands of the situation and its task and reward structure” (Epel et al., 1999, p. 590). These researchers found that among the unemployed living in homeless shelters and experiencing pressure to find other affordable accommodations, it may be better to be present-oriented when dealing with an acute crisis. Whereas future TP allows a greater degree of self-efficacy and fosters optimism for future gains, present orientation may be more effective in allowing one to be open to finding immediate solutions to current challenges. This is just one of the examples to show that temporal flexibility is important for dealing with extreme circumstances, but there is also emerging evidence to demonstrate how such flexibility may be important in dealing with the hassles of everyday life.

Although Zimbardo and Boyd (2008) did not develop any direct indicator of BTP, they proposed an interesting starting point for its empirical operationalizations by formulating a description of an optimal mix of time perspectives. The authors proposed that the optimal TP profile consists of:

• High on Past-Positive TP
• Moderately high on Future TP
• Moderately high on Present-Hedonistic TP
• Low on Past-Negative TP
• Low on Present-Fatalistic TP

Based on these theoretical foundations, several attempts have been made to operationalize the BTP construct. Current literature distinguishes between four different approaches to measuring balanced time perspective: The 33rd percentile cut-off approach (Drake, Duncan, Sutherland, Abernethy, & Henry, 2008), resulting in selecting about 5% of respondents with a BTP; cluster analysis approach (Boniwell, Osin, Linley, & Ivanchenko, 2010), resulting in a larger proportion of respondents selected as BTP (10% to 23%); the Deviation from Balanced Time Perspective method (Stolarski, Bitner, & Zimbardo, 2011; Zhang, Howell, & Stolarski, 2013), resulting in a linear and normally distributed variable; and a combined approach proposed by Wiberg, Sircova, Wiberg and Carelli (2012), also confirming the BTP as a normally distributed trait. A first qualitative in-depth study of the BTP individuals using interpretative phenomenological analysis showed that these individuals have a substantial consciousness of the “now” or the present moment, and they see both the past and the present, as well as the present and the future, as synchronously integrated (Wiberg, Wiberg, Carelli, & Sircova, 2012).

The results of the proposed operationalizations are that there are both strong sides and drawbacks of each approach and that the BTP construct is not yet totally explored and clarified. A great amount of work has to be done in the future, including additional exploratory case studies to get a clearer and more complete picture of the BTP construct from empirical studies in order to fully understand this optimal time-perspective profile.

Time Perspective and Well-Being

Over the years, there have been various attempts to establish a relationship between TP and well-being. However, taking into account the variety and complexity of measures of both TP and well-being, it is hardly surprising that early findings were inconsistent and often contradictory. A number of scholars hypothesized that a time orientation with a focus on the present is a necessary prerequisite for well-being. Among them are Csikszentmihalyi (1992), Maslow (1971), and Schopenhauer (1851), with their emphasis on the value of here-and-now experiences (see Boyd-Wilson, Walkey, & McClure, 2002).

Applications of Time Perspective Research

Despite being conceived primarily at a theoretical level, the constructs of TP and a balanced TP offer considerable potential for practical interventions in clinical and occupational psychology. However, such implementations are conspicuous by their absence. Possible avenues of practical implementations can range from time-based clinical interventions with depressed patients to rehabilitation programs with disabled persons to time management counseling with elderly clients, to time-perspective based coaching.

Consider the development of clinical interventions designed for people with cognitive distortions associated with recurrent depression. Often, these clients are negatively past-focused, with global attributions, which taken together render them vulnerable to depressive ruminative cycles. An intervention program would focus on teaching them how to reconstruct past negative experiences by either neutralizing them or discovering some hidden positive elements in them. Clients could be given a slideshow metaphor training in which they learn to switch away from replaying the old slides of past negative experiences by inserting new slides into their tray and then viewing these encouraging perspectives of current positive experiences and imagined slides of a better future.

Persons suffering from disabilities typically must undergo long periods of physical rehabilitation that is effortful and painful. Many discontinue this critical treatment before it has had a chance to improve their condition precisely because of these aversive aspects of the retraining. We believe that time therapy focused on building an enriched future orientation while minimizing the present would benefit such clients. It is only with a sense of hope of improvement, of belief that present suffering will pay off in the future, that anyone can continue in rehabilitation programs that have few immediate rewards and much pain (see Zimbardo, in press).

Knowledge and understanding of TP can be a useful tool in psychological counseling. An insight into how clients think and feel about past, present, and future experiences and about their connectedness and disconnections serves as a starting point for therapeutic explorations. Extending the ideas we have championed throughout this chapter, we believe that a strong, narrowly selective temporal bias in a client should alert a counselor or therapist of a fundamental platform on which many presenting problems are erected. Seemingly disparate problems may then be seen as symptomatic of a common underlying temporal misbalance, thus the need for temporal adjustment and rebalancing (see Kazakina, 1999).

There are some rare examples of qualitative investigations of people's psychological attitudes and perception of time that reveal how discussions about time have had unexpectedly positive therapeutic effects (Elliot, 1999; Rappaport, 1990). An exploration of an individual's relationship with time has the potential to direct awareness toward fuller evaluations of his or her life, toward finding the links and connections between past and present events. Doing so helps to develop a sense of continuity between temporal zones and facilitates the process of finding deeper meaning in his or her existence. Such potential can be invaluable in working with specific categories of clients in clinical psychology, including the elderly and terminally ill. It is plausible that achieving a temporal balance can facilitate the sense of fuller involvement with life, which some believe to be paramount for successful aging (Kazakina, 1999).

Time perspective coaching is gaining in prominence both as applied to executive and life coaching domains (Boniwell, 2005). To give a taste of this process, how can the concept of TP be consciously and usefully applied in the consulting room? The first step, of course, is suggesting to the client to explore the concept together, if the coach feels it may be of relevance. Assuming the client is interested, the coach can invite him or her to discover what their time perspective profile may look like using ZTPI, which is available for free on the Time Paradox website (http://www.thetimeparadox.com/). With the exception of individuals who have had prior psychometric training, the role of the coach thereafter is not so much to communicate and explain the ZTPI results to the client, but rather to accompany the client in trying to make sense of their own results, using emerging reactions as triggers for deepening the coaching conversation. The identification of the client's TP profile could initiate further coaching work around specific issues associated with the client's time-perspective profile, using both appropriate questions and relevant evidence-based interventions (Boniwell and Osin, in press). Thus, for example, clients with a prominent Past-Negative TP may find it useful to undergo a process of creating a personal positive portfolio, derived from their previous personal experience of positive emotions (Fredrickson, 2009). Those interested in developing a stronger Past-Positive TP may be encouraged to create a family tree or a birthdays calendar (people low on the Past-Positive TP are usually the ones that forget everyone's birthdays), as well as participating in community projects or events. Development of a Present-Hedonistic TP may be facilitated by savoring and mindfulness (Bryant & Veroff, 2007), while fostering the Future TP can be achieved through the future best self process or best possible selves diary (Lyubomirsky, 2008). Needless to say, different methods would apply to coaching work aimed at minimizing excessive “positive” orientations, be it the Present-Hedonistic or Future TP.

The concept of balanced TP can also be fruitfully implemented in an organizational context. It is our belief that the current pressures being experienced by workers in offices and factories around the world will not be resolved by more time-management techniques. Normative experience is that within about 6 months following a time-management training program, participants revert to their own practices of time management. We believe this happens for two reasons. First, these programs are promoted by management and essentially are designed to make workers more future-oriented, more productive, and less wasteful of company time. But much of the sense of time press and work urgency comes from workers who are already overly future-oriented. They need very different time training. Secondly, most time-management techniques are not tied to the actual psychology of people's understanding of time. The construct of TP has a potential to provide a theoretical underpinning for time management interventions. The focus of time-management techniques can shift from advocating generalized time-management strategies—such as taking time off or putting more focus on their work—to developing interventions based on an understanding of workers' TP profiles. Doing so would help in recognizing the associated internal states and TP cognitive biases that unconsciously dominate workers. Such techniques can be useful in reducing and, ideally, preventing occupational stress. They can also be invaluable in solving the eternal dilemma of balancing the dialectic of work and play/leisure or of work as a source of personal engagement versus a source of job burnout (Maslach & Leiter, 1997).

There are sufficient theoretical grounds to assume that personalizing TP interventions to the client's existing profile would help to address their issues with time-management behaviors; however, further research would be needed to make this assumption a certainty. In the meantime, we believe that taking even baby steps toward developing a more balanced TP is already a valuable goal in itself.

Conclusion

Working hard when it's time to work, playing intensively when it's time to play, enjoying listening to grandma's old stories while she is still alive, meaningfully connecting with your friends, viewing children through the eyes of wonder with which they see the world, laughing at jokes and life's absurdities, indulging in desire and passions, saving for a rainy day and spending it when it's sunny, recognizing the social and sexual animal in each of us, taking fuller control of your life—these are all part of the benefits of learning to achieve a balanced-time perspective. They are the keys to unlocking personal happiness and finding more meaning in life despite the relentless, indifferent movement of life's time clock toward its final ticking for each of us. The value of the concept of a balanced time perspective is that it both suggests novel approaches to a wide range of psychological interventions while offering yet another answer to positive psychology's enduring question—What is a good life, and how can we pursue it?

Summary Points

• Time perspective is a preferential direction of an individual's thoughts toward the past, present, or future that exerts a dynamic influence on their experience, motivation, thinking, and several aspects of behavior.
• ZTPI, the primary measure of time perspective, distinguishes between five time perspective profiles: Past-Negative, Past-Positive, Present-Fatalistic, Present-Hedonistic, and Future.
• The idea of a balanced time perspective emerges as an alternative to any particular temporal bias. In an optimally balanced time perspective, the past, present, and future components engage flexibly in response to individuals' values and preferences, while taking into account a situation's context and demands at the same time.
• Across the numerous studies, we have seen that each of the time perspectives, as well as composite measures of a balanced time perspective have a role to play influencing people's happiness.
• Another needed venue for researchers and practitioners is the development of intervention strategies that empower individuals to overcome the limitations of their learned, narrow temporal biases and to acquire a balanced temporal orientation.

References

1. Block, R. A. (1990). Introduction. In R. A. Block (Ed.), Cognitive models of psychological time (pp. xiii–xix). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
2. Bond, M., & Feather, N. (1988). Some correlates of structure and purpose in the use of time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 321–329.
3. Boniwell, I. (2005). Beyond time management: How the latest research on time perspective and perceived time use can assist clients with time-related concerns. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 3(2), 61–74.
4. Boniwell, I., & Osin, E. (in press). Time perspective coaching. In M. J. Stolarski, W. van Beek, & N. Fieulaine (Eds.), The handbook of time perspective. New York, NY: Springer.
5. Boniwell, I., Osin, E., Linley, P. A., & Ivanchenko, G. (2010). A question of balance: Examining relationships between time perspective and measures of well-being in the British and Russian student samples. Journal of Positive Psychology, 5(1), 24–40.
6. Boniwell, I., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2003). Time to find the right balance. The Psychologist, 16, 129–131.
7. Boyd, J. N., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2005). Time perspective, health, and risk taking. In A. Strathman & J. Joireman (Eds.), Understanding behavior in the context of time (pp. 85–107). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. Boyd-Wilson, B. M., Walkey, F. H., & McClure, J. (2002). Present and correct: We kid ourselves less when we live in the moment. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 691–702.
9. Bryant, F. B., & Veroff, J. (2007). Savouring: A new model of positive experiences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. Carr, M. A. (1985). The effects of aging and depression on time perspective in women (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY.
11. Cottle, T. J. (1976). Perceiving time. New York, NY: Wiley.
12. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1992). Flow: The psychology of happiness. London, England: Rider.
13. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.
14. Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Very happy people. Psychological Science, 13, 81–84.
15. Drake, L., Duncan, E., Sutherland, F., Abernethy, C., & Henry, C. (2008). Time perspective and correlates of wellbeing. Time & Society, 17, 47–61.
16. Elliot, M. K. (1999). Time, work, and meaning (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Pacifica Graduate Institute, Carpinteria, California.
17. Epel, E., Bandura, A., & Zimbardo, P. G. (1999). Escaping homelessness: The influences of self-efficacy and time perspective on coping with homelessness. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 575–596.
18. Fredrickson, B. L. (2009). Positivity. New York, NY: Crown.
19. Gonzalez, A., & Zimbardo, P. G. (1985). Time in perspective: A Psychology Today survey report. Psychology Today, 19, 21–26.
20. Gorman, B. S., & Wessman, A. E. (1977). Images, values, and concepts of time in psychological research. In B. S. Gorman & A. E. Wessman (Eds.), The personal experience of time (pp. 218–264). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
21. Hornik, J., & Zakay, D. (1996). Psychological time: The case of time and consumer behavior. Time and Society, 5, 385–397.
22. Kahana, E., & Kahana, B. (1983). Environmental continuity, futurity, and adaptation of the aged. In G. D. Rowles & R. J. Ohta (Eds.), Aging and milieu (pp. 205–228). New York, NY: Haworth Press.
23. Kammann, R., & Flett, R. (1983). Affectometer 2: A scale to measure current level of general happiness. Australian Journal of Psychology, 35, 259–265.
24. Kazakina, E. (1999). Time perspective of older adults: Relationships to attachment style, psychological well-being and psychological distress (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Columbia University, New York, NY.
25. Keough, K. A., Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (1999). Who's smoking, drinking, and using drugs? Time perspective as a predictor of substance use. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21, 149–164.
26. Lennings, C. J. (1996). Self-efficacy and temporal orientation as predictors of treatment outcome in severely dependent alcoholics. Alcoholism Treatment Quarterly, 14, 71–79.
27. Lennings, C. J. (1998). Profiles of time perspective and personality: Developmental considerations. Journal of Psychology, 132, 629–642.
28. Lennings, C. J. (2000a). Optimism, satisfaction and time perspective in the elderly. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 51, 168–181.
29. Lennings, C. J. (2000b). The Stanford Time Perspective Inventory: An analysis of temporal orientation for research in health psychology. Journal of Applied Health Behavior, 2, 40–45.
30. Lofy, M. M. (2000). A matter of time: Power, control, and meaning in people's everyday experience of time (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Fielding Institute, Santa Barbara, CA.
31. Lyubomirsky, S. (2008). The how of happiness: A practical guide to getting the life you want. London, England: Sphere.
32. Maslach, C., & Leiter, M. (1997). The truth about burnout: How organizations cause personal stress and what to do about it. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
33. Maslow, A. H. (1971). Farther reaches of human nature. New York, NY: Viking Penguin.
34. McGrath, J. E. (Ed.). (1988). The social psychology of time: New perspectives (Vol. 1). New York, NY: Sage.
35. McGrath, J. E., & Kelly, J. (1986). Time and human interaction: Toward a social psychology of time. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
36. Myers, D. G. (2000). The American paradox: Spiritual hunger in an age of plenty. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
37. Rappaport, H. (1990). Making time. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
38. Schopenhauer, A. (1851). The wisdom of life [English translation, 1890]. London, England: Swan Sonnenschein.
39. Seligman, M. E. P. (1999). Mission statement and conclusion of Akumal 1. Retrieved from http://psych.upenn.edu/seligman/pospsy.htm
40. Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55, 5–14.
41. Stolarski, M., Bitner, J., & Zimbardo, P. G. (2011). Time perspective, emotional intelligence and discounting of delayed awards. Time & Society, 20(3), 346–363.
42. Weber, M. (1992). The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. London, England: Routledge. (Original work published 1930)
43. Wessman, A. E., & Ricks, D. F. (1966). Mood and personality. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
44. Wiberg, M., Sircova, A., Wiberg, B., & Carelli, M. G. (2012). Operationalizing balanced time perspective in a Swedish sample. International Journal of Educational and Psychological Assessment, 12(1), 95–107.
45. Wiberg, B., Wiberg, M., Carelli, M. G., & Sircova, A. (2012). A qualitative and quantitative study of seven persons with balanced time perspective (BTP) according to S-ZTPI. Poster presented at the First International Conference on Time Perspective and Research: Converging Paths in Psychology Time Theory and Research, Coimbra, Portugal.
46. Zhang, L., Karabenick, S. A., Maruno, S., & Lauermann, F. (2011). Academic delay of gratification and children's study time allocation as a function of proximity to consequential academic goals. Learning and Instruction, 21(1), 77–94.
47. Zhang, J. W., & Howell, R. T. (2011). Do time perspectives predict unique variance in life satisfaction beyond personality traits? Personality and Individual Differences, 50(8), 1261–1266.
48. Zhang, J. W., Howell, R. T., & Stolarski, M. (2013). Comparing three methods to measure a balanced time perspective: The relationship between a balanced time perspective and subjective well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14(1), 169–184.
49. Zimbardo, P. G. (1992). Draft Manual, Stanford Time Perspective Inventory. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
50. Zimbardo, P. G. (2002). Just think about it: Time to take our time. Psychology Today, 35, 62.
51. Zimbardo, P. G. (in press). Enriching psychological research on disability. In D. F. Thomas & F. E. Menz (Eds.), Bridging gaps: Refining the disability research agenda for rehabilitation and the social sciences—Conference proceedings. Menomonie: University of Wisconsin-Stout, Stout Vocational Rehabilitation Institute, Research and Training Center.
52. Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (1999). Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1271–1288.
53. Zimbardo, P., & Boyd, J. (2008). The time paradox: The new psychology of time that will change your life. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
54. Zimbardo, P. G., & Gonzalez, A. (1984). A Psychology Today reader survey. Psychology Today, 18, 53–54.
55. Zimbardo, P. G., Keough, K. A., & Boyd, J. N. (1997). Present time perspective as a predictor of risky driving. Personality and Individual Differences, 23, 1007–1023.