My first pressing issue comes up when she states that 'Regardless of outcome, optimists feel better about the outcome, because of attribution of the event.' The optimist, if successful says they succeeded by their merits. If they fail it's because the test is somehow biased against them. She asserts the opposite is also true, a pessimist when successful attributes it to the failure of the system/test, while if they fail, it's because of their own shortcomings. Anytime there is causal(not casual) attribution, there can be fundamental attribution error. (Example, see someone driving erratically, your first instinct is usually 'asshole' over 'ill or in some other distress.') She later asserts that being aware of the positive effects of optimism work, even if an individual understands how they work, which has no backing, and is subjective.