D.Litt. et Phil. / The aim of this study was to determine possible relationships between sense of coherence, temperament and decision-making and to explore the nature of these relationships. The study was based on the assumption that people attempt to make sense of complex environments and that differences in certain biological and psychological characteristics may lead to differences in the way that people make decisions in complex environments. Temperament was defined as a biological or physiological aspect that influences human behaviour. Sense of coherence was conceptualised as a psychological, global orientation that influences the way in which individuals understand their environments and can therefore give rise to individual differences in behaviour. Decision-making style was defined as a specific behavioural manifestation of the manner in which individuals make sense of complex environments and it was postulated that decision-making would probably be influenced by temperament and sense of coherence. In order to explore the current study’s research questions, a sample of 189 third year and Honours students in Psychology at a tertiary institution was used. The ages of the participants ranged from 19 tot 34 years and the average age was 22 years. More women (91.5%) participated in the study than men (8.5%). As a result of practicalities it was impossible to use a random sample. Three self-report measurements were used to respectively measure sense of coherence, temperament and decision-making style. These were the Orientation to Life Questionnaire, Pavlovian Temperament Survey and Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire. The Pavlovian Temperament Survey measures three characteristics of the nervous system namely Strength of Excitation, Strength of Inhibition and Mobility of the Nervous Processes. An additional sub-scale was added to measure Balance of the Nervous Processes. The Orientation to Life Questionnaire measures Comprehensibility, Manageability, Meaningfulness as well as total Sense of Coherence. The Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire measures four decision-making styles: one effective style, Vigilance and three ineffective styles, Procrastination, Hypervigilance and Buck Passing. The raw data that were collected from the completed questionnaires were subjected to several statistical analyses. The data were tested for normality of sub-scale distributions, which lead to logistical regression analyses being used to determine if temperament and sense of coherence can predict differences in decision-making style. Pearson product moment correlations as well as canonical correlations were also used. Multiple analyses of variance were used to determine whether biographical variables could account for any differences in sense of coherence, temperament and decision-making style. The results indicated that differences due to language, year of study or work status did not affect scores with regard to sense of coherence, temperament or decision-making style. The sample could therefore be regarded as quite homogeneous and the effect of confounding variables could be limited. However, generalisability of the results was also compromised. It was found that Strength of Excitation, Strength of Inhibition and Mobility of the Nervous Processes displayed relationships with Sense of coherence as well as the individual aspects of sense of coherence namely Comprehensibility, Manageability and Meaningfulness. This finding points to the possibility that physiological responses and psychological assessment of complex environments are related. Even though Balance of the Nervous Processes was not indicated as related to sense of coherence, it was found that this characteristic of the nervous system may possibly relate to decision-making. In line with these findings, the results indicated the possibility of relationships between a person’s psychological assessment of situations and behavioural outcomes as relationships were found between sense of coherence and decision-making style. It was indicated that certain temperament dimensions possibly displays an inverse relationship with decision-making styles, and especially the use of a hypervigilant decision-making style. However, the role of temperament in the use of a vigilant decision-making style is unclear. Lastly, the results indicated that the emotional assessment of stimuli as meaningful and challenging may possibly give rise to the use of a vigilant decision-making style. The assessment of situations as chaotic and unstructured could possibly relate more to the use of ineffective decision-making styles. An overall conclusion that can be made is that relationships between sense of coherence, temperament and decision-making style do indeed exist but that the nature of the relationships is quite complex. It seems as if different mechanisms are at play with regard to determining the use of effective and ineffective decision-making styles. These mechanisms could possibly lie in the emotional and cognitive assessments of situations. It seems as if a healthy emotional assessment of situations as challenging and meaningful precede the use of an effective, cognitively-based decision-making style. The cognitive assessment of situations as chaotic and unstructured could possibly lead to a more emotional decision-making response and decisions may be postponed, its responsibility may be shifted or it may be handled in a panicky manner. The results of this study should be interpreted with care since the sample was quite homogeneous and not particularly large. The exclusive use of the Melbourne Decision Making Questionnaire to measure decision-making is also problematic and the inclusion of an objective measurement of decision-making efficiency would have been preferable. It is also unclear whether reported decision-making style is equal to true decision-making style. Lastly, it was also decided to move away from Antonovsky’s (1987) recommendations that sense of coherence be treated as one global construct and the individual sub-scales were analysed separately. Future research can make use of similar variables and statistical techniques with bigger and more diverse samples to facilitate the development of an explanatory model for behaviour within complex environments. If the same variables are used, other measurements should be included to expand the conceptual framework. Future research could also test the current findings in practice for example in training or therapy.

M.A. / The current social and political situation in South Africa has resulted in an extremely violent climate in which the incidence of highly stressful events experienced by people on the whole is extremely high. The severe and pathological negative symptoms that often follow the experience of highly stressful events are defined as Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders - IV (DSM-IV)(APA, 1994). An improved understanding of the factors involved in the development, treatment and prevention of PTSD is important considering the potentially debilitating effects of this disorder. With the increasing emphasis being placed on 'positive' psychology, the salutogenic orientation was given focus in this study. Antonovsky (1979, 1987) defines salutogenesis as 'the origins of health', and the emphasis is on identifying those factors in which health originates and is promoted. This study aimed to investigate two specific variables, sense of coherence (Antonovsky, 1979, 1987) and self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977, 1986) as two potential psychological resilience factors that may positively contribute to effective functioning after the experience of a highly traumatic event. The research tested a postulated model which suggested that the two resilience variables influence the presentation of PTSD symptoms after exposure to a traumatic event. The research was conducted in a police and banking environment with 50 participants, all of whom had experienced a traumatic event as defined by the criteria in the DSM-IV. Three measuring instruments were used to measure the constructs of interest. PTSD symptomatology was measured by means of Horowitz's "Impact of Events Scale - Revised" (Weiss & Marmar, 1997), self-efficacy in the face of a traumatic event was measured by means of a specific questionnaire constructed by the researcher for this study (SEFTE), and sense of coherence was measured by means of Antonovsky's "Orientation to Life" questionnaire, or Sense of Coherence Scale (1983). The results of the study indicated that a relationship does exist between the three constructs of interest. A higher sense of coherence. contributes to higher selfefficacy expectations in the face of a traumatic event, and both these variables reduce the level of PTSD symptomatology after exposure to a traumatic event. In conclusion, the importance of understanding some of the psychological resilience factors which may help to prevent PTSD after exposure to a traumatic event, or at least reduce the severity of the symptoms, was highlighted. By doing so, emphasis can be moved from the treatment of PTSD after the event, to the prevention of the disorder, by strengthening the resilience of those people at risk of exposure to a highly traumatic event, before the event occurs.

M.A. / The primary objective of this study is to investigate the relationship between Locus of Control, Individualism/Collectivism and Sense of Coherence between two groups of participants by using three measures. The study will also investigate the significance of the relationship between Locus of Control and the Individualism/Collectivism, and between Sense of Coherence and Locus of Control. The motivation for the study stems from a question regarding how cultural perceptual style interacts with personality traits to influence a person's Sense of Coherence. A further question faced by all South Africans, regards how one adapts to the cultural changes being experienced in the country, while at the same time maintaining a sense of self·identity. While there are many possible questions, this study will focus on investigating the interaction between the three constructs of Sense of Coherence. Locus of Control, and Individualism/Collectivism. The three core constructs of Sense of Coherence. Locus of Control, and Individualism/Collectivism are defined as follows: • Antonovsky (1987) defines Sense of Coherence as a global orientation that expresses the extent to which one has a pervasive. enduring though dynamic feeling of confidence as a function of one's sense of comprehensibility, manageability, and meaningfulness. • Locus of Control refers to a generalised disposition. acquired from past experience, to believe that rewards either are, or are not, controllable by a person's own efforts. Such that those who are externally oriented hold the view that their success is due to factors outside their control such as chance and luck while internally oriented persons attribute success to their personal effort and ability. • Individualism and Collectivism are cultural perceptual styles which indicate whether individuals acts largely for their self interests, or in regard for collective group harmony.