presented a developmental model of hope embedded within a social-cognitive framework. This is a feature common to most contemporary theories of reality negotiation processes. However, in this comment on the Snyder et al. piece, the authors believe that there are alternative accounts of the goal-directed behavior associated with hope that warrant consideration. They briefly describe these competing accounts available in Kohutian self psychology and in multicultural models of behavior. They note points of convergence and divergence, along with implications for clinical practice and theory-driven research. Snyder, Cheavens, and Sympson (1997) have attempted to satisfy a glaring need in our understanding of reality negotiation processes. Specifically, they have delineated basic familial and social dynamics that play an instrumental role in the development of hope in the individual. Furthermore, they have thoughtfully considered ways in which hope affects interpersonal interactions and group behavior. Clinicians have recognized for some time that hope is a critical element of effective group therapy (Yalom, 1985). Yet, a theoretical framework is needed to help clinicians understand how hope develops to appreciate deficiencies and then to design theoretically driven interventions that may augment, instill, refurbish, or build hope in persons who seek psychological services.The dynamics described by Snyder et al. (1997) are grounded in a social-cognitive framework, consonant with most contemporary views of reality negotiation (e.g., Snyder, 1989;Taylor & Brown, 1988). This model stipulates that goal-oriented beliefs and behaviors are modeled by significant others in the individual's early interpersonal environment. These beliefs are then internalized, and the behaviors are