Susan Folkman

An analysis of coping in a middle-aged community sample

This study analyzes the ways 100 community-residing men and women aged 45 to 64 coped with the stressful events of daily living during one year. Lazaruss cognitive-phenomenological analysis of psychological stress provides the theoreticalframework. Information about recently experienced stressful encounters was elicited through monthly interviews and self-report questionnaires completed between interviews. At the end of each interview and questionnaire, the participant indicated on a 68-item Ways of Coping checklist those coping thoughts and actions used in the specific encounter. A mean of 13.3 episodes was reported by each participant. Two functions of coping, problem-focused and emotion-focused, are analyzed with separate measures. Both problemand emotion-focused coping were used in 98% of the 1,332 episodes, emphasizing that coping conceptualized in either defensive or problem-solving terms is incomplete-both functions are usually involved. Intraindividual analyses show that people are more variable than consistent in their coping patterns. The context of an event, who is involved, how it is appraised, age, and gender are examined as potential influences on coping. Context and how the event is appraised are the most potent factors. Work contexts favor problem-focused coping, and health contexts favor emotionfocused coping. Situations in which the person thinks something constructive can be done or that are appraised as requiring more information favor problem-focused coping, whereas those having to be acceptedfavor emotion-focused coping. There are no effects associated with age, and gender differences emerge only in problem-focused coping: Men use more problem-focused coping than women at work and in situations having to be accepted and requiring more information. Contrary to the cultural stereotype, there are no gender differences in emotionfocused coping.

If It Changes It Must Be a Process: Study of Emotion and Coping During Three Stages of a College Examination

This natural experiment provides substantial evidence for the following major themes, which are based on a cognitively oriented, process-centered theory of stress and coping: First, a stressful encounter should be viewed as a dynamic, unfolding process, not as a static, unitary event. Emotion and coping (including the use of social support) were assessed at three stages of a midterm examination: the anticipation stage before the exam, the waiting stage after the exam and before grades were announced, and after grades were posted. For the group as a whole there were significant changes in emotions and coping (including the use of social support) across the three stages. Second, people experience seemingly contradictory emotions and states of mind during every stage of an encounter. In this study, for example, subjects experienced both threat emotions and challege emotions. The complexity of emotions and their cognitive appraisals reflects ambiguity regarding the multifaceted nature of the exam and its meanings, especially during the anticipation stage. Third, coping is a complex process. On the average, subjects used combinations of most of the available forms of problem-focused coping and emotion-focused coping at every stage of the exam. Different forms of coping were salient during the anticipation and waiting stages. Problem-focused coping and emphasizing the positive were more prominent during the former, and distancing more prominent during the latter. Finally, despite normatively shared emotional reactions at each stage, substantial individual differences remained. Using selected appraisal and coping variables, and taking grade point averages (GPA) into account, approximately 48% of the variances in threat and challenge emotions at the anticipation stage was explained. Controlling for variance due to the grade received, appraisal, and coping variables accounted for 28% of the variance in positive and negative emotions at the outcome stage. Including grade, 57% of the variance in positive emotions at outcome and 61% of the negative emotions at outcome were explained.

Dynamics of a Stressful Encounter: Cognitive Appraisal, Coping, and Encounter Outcomes

Despite the importance that is attributed to coping as a factor in psychological and somatic health outcomes, little is known about actual coping processes, the variables that influence them, and their relation to the outcomes of the stressful encounters people experience in their day-to-day lives. This study uses an intraindividual analysis of the interrelations among primary appraisal (what was at stake in the encounter), secondary appraisal (coping options), eight forms of problem- and emotion-focused coping, and encounter outcomes in a sample of community-residing adults. Coping was strongly related to cognitive appraisal; the forms of coping that were used varied depending on what was at stake and the options for coping. Coping was also differentially related to satisfactory and unsatisfactory encounter outcomes. The findings clarify the functional relations among appraisal and coping variables and the outcomes of stressful encounters.

Socioeconomic status and health: the challenge of the gradient.

Socioeconomic status (SES) is consistently associated with health outcomes, yet little is known about the psychosocial and behavioral mechanisms that might explain this association. Researchers usually control for SES rather than examine it. When it is studied, only effects of lower, poverty-level SES are generally examined. However, there is evidence of a graded association with health at all levels of SES, an observation that requires new thought about domains through which SES may exert its health effects. Variables are highlighted that show a graded relationship with both SES and health to provide examples of possible pathways between SES and health end points. Examples are also given of new analytic approaches that can better illuminate the complexities of the SES-health gradient.

Appraisal, Coping, Health Status, and Psychological Symptoms

In this study we examined the relation between personality factors (mastery and interpersonal trust), primary appraisal (the stakes a person has in a stressful encounter), secondary appraisal (options for coping), eight forms of problem- and emotion-focused coping, and somatic health status and psychological symptoms in a sample of 150 community-residing adults. Appraisal and coping processes should be characterized by a moderate degree of stability across stressful encounters for them to have an effect on somatic health status and psychological symptoms. These processes were assessed in five different stressful situations that subjects experienced in their day-to-day lives. Certain processes (e.g., secondary appraisal) were highly variable, whereas others (e.g., emotion-focused forms of coping) were moderately stable. We entered mastery and interpersonal trust, and primary appraisal and coping variables (aggregated over five occasions), into regression analyses of somatic health status and psychological symptoms. The variables did not explain a significant amount of the variance in somatic health status, but they did explain a significant amount of the variance in psychological symptoms. The pattern of relations indicated that certain variables were positively associated and others negatively associated with symptoms.

Positive affect and the other side of coping.

Although research on coping over the past 30 years has produced convergent evidence about the functions of coping and the factors that influence it, psychologists still have a great deal to learn about how coping mechanisms affect diverse outcomes. One of the reasons more progress has not been made is the almost exclusive focus on negative outcomes in the stress process. Coping theory and research need to consider positive outcomes as well. The authors focus on one such outcome, positive affect, and review findings about the co-occurrence of positive affect with negative affect during chronic stress, the adaptive functions of positive affect during chronic stress, and a special class of meaning-based coping processes that support positive affect during chronic stress.

Positive psychological states and coping with severe stress

Providing care to a spouse or partner who is dying and then losing that person are among the most stressful of human experiences. A longitudinal study of the caregiving partners of men with AIDS showed that in addition to intense negative psychological states, these men also experienced positive psychological state states throughout caregiving and bereavement. The co-occurrence of positive and negative psychological states in the midst of enduring and profoundly stressful circumstances has important implications for our understanding of the coping process. Coping theory had traditionally focused on the management of distress. This article describes coping processes that are associated with positive psychological states in the context of intense distress and discusses the theoretical implications of positive psychological states in the coping process.

The impact of daily stress on health and mood: Psychological and social resources as mediators.

This study examined daily stress processes among 75 married couples across 20 assessments during a 6-month period. The somatic and psychological effects of common everyday hassles were investigated. Overall, there was a significant relationship between daily stress and the occurrence of both concurrent and subsequent health problems such as flu, sore throat, headaches, and backaches. The relationship of daily stress to mood disturbance was more complex. The negative effects of stress on mood were limited to a single day, with the following day characterized by mood scores that were better than usual. Furthermore, striking individual differences were found in the extent to which daily stress was associated with health and mood across time. Participants with unsupportive social relationships and low self-esteem were more likely to experience an increase in psychological and somatic problems both on and following stressful days than were participants high in self-esteem and social support. These data suggest that persons with low psychosocial resources are vulnerable to illness and mood disturbance when their stress levels increase, even if they generally have little stress in their lives.

Meaning in the context of stress and coping.

Although theoretical and empirical work on topics related to meaning and meaning making proliferate, careful evaluation and integration of this area have not been carried out. Toward this end, this article has 3 goals: (a) to elaborate the critical dimensions of meaning as it relates to stressful life events and conditions, (b) to extend the transactional model of stress and coping to include these dimensions, and (c) to provide a framework for understanding current research and directions for future research within this extended model. First, the authors present a framework for understanding diverse conceptual and operational definitions of meaning by distinguishing 2 levels of meaning, termed global meaning and situationalmeaning. Second, the authors use this framework to review and synthesize the literature on the functions of meaning in the coping process and propose a definition of meaningmaking that highlights the critical role of reappraisal. The authors specify the roles of attributions throughout the coping process and discuss implications for future research.

Transactional theory and research on emotions and coping

In this article we examine the fundamental premises of our cognitive‐relational theory of emotion and coping and assess our progress in examining them through 10 years of programmatic empirical research. Our discussion involves the metatheoretical topics of transaction and relationship, process, and emotion as a system. The person‐environment relationship is mediated by two key processess: cognitive appraisal and coping. We evaluate the findings of our research on these processes, their dynamic interplay, their antecedents, and their short‐term and long‐term outcomes. In the final section we highlight major substantive and methodological issues that need to be addressed. These include issues surrounding the theory and measurement of appraisal, functional and dysfunctional coping, causal inference, microanalytic vs macroanalytic research strategies, objective vs subjective approaches and confounding, and the problem of method variance.