Managing Stress from Theory to Application

PSYCHOLOGY RESEARCH PROGRESS

MANAGING STRESS

FROM THEORY TO APPLICATION

No part of this digital document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form orby any means. The publisher has taken reasonable care in the preparation of this digital document, but makes noexpressed or implied warranty of any kind and assumes no responsibility for any errors or omissions. Noliability is assumed for incidental or consequential damages in connection with or arising out of informationcontained herein. This digital document is sold with the clear understanding that the publisher is not engaged inrendering legal, medical or any other professional services.


Additional books in this series can be found on Novas website

under the Series tab.

Additional E-books in this series can be found on Novas website

under the E-books tab.


MANAGING STRESS

FROM THEORY TO APPLICATION

TRACEY J. DEVONPORT

EDITOR

Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

New York

Copyright 2011 by Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or

transmitted in any form or by any means: electronic, electrostatic, magnetic, tape, mechanical

photocopying, recording or otherwise without the written permission of the Publisher.

For permission to use material from this book please contact us:

Telephone 631-231-7269; Fax 631-231-8175

Web Site: http://www.novapublishers.com

NOTICE TO THE READER

The Publisher has taken reasonable care in the preparation of this book, but makes no expressed or

implied warranty of any kind and assumes no responsibility for any errors or omissions. No

liability is assumed for incidental or consequential damages in connection with or arising out of

information contained in this book. The Publisher shall not be liable for any special,

consequential, or exemplary damages resulting, in whole or in part, from the readers use of, or

reliance upon, this material. Any parts of this book based on government reports are so indicated

and copyright is claimed for those parts to the extent applicable to compilations of such works.

Independent verification should be sought for any data, advice or recommendations contained in

this book. In addition, no responsibility is assumed by the publisher for any injury and/or damage

to persons or property arising from any methods, products, instructions, ideas or otherwise

contained in this publication.

This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information with regard to the

subject matter covered herein. It is sold with the clear understanding that the Publisher is not

engaged in rendering legal or any other professional services. If legal or any other expert

assistance is required, the services of a competent person should be sought. FROM A

DECLARATION OF PARTICIPANTS JOINTLY ADOPTED BY A COMMITTEE OF THE

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION AND A COMMITTEE OF PUBLISHERS.

Additional color graphics may be available in the e-book version of this book.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Managing stress : from theory to application / editor, Tracey J. Devonport.

p. cm.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 978-1-61470-748-6 (eBook) 1. Stress (Psychology) 2. Stress management. I. Devonport, Tracey J.

BF575.S75M325 2011

155.9'042--dc23

2011025517

Published by Nova Science Publishers, Inc. New York

DEDICATION

I wish to acknowledge the support of my parents Carol and Keith Devonport from whom

I have learned so much. In addition I wish to acknowledge my partner Cat who is also ever

supportive, considerate and kind. Finally, this book is dedicated to my son Finlay James.

Finlay has given my world a whole new dimension and one I would never wish to look back

from.

Much love,

Tracey

CONTENTS

Dedication v

Preface ix

Chapter 1 A Brief Review of Commonly Used Theories

and the Importance of Applying Theory in Practice 1 Tracey Devonport

Chapter 2 The Utility of Stress and Coping Theory When

Working with Athletes 13 Tracey Devonport

Chapter 3 The Utility of Stress and Coping Theory when Working

with Sports Officials 47 Tracey Devonport

Chapter 4 Coping with Stress as a Sports Coach:

Putting Theory into Practice 77 Richard Thelwell

Chapter 5 Stress and Work Psychology 101 Tony Cassidy

Chapter 6 Stress and Policing: A Retrospective Reflection

and Contemporary Updating 127 Jennifer Brown

Chapter 7 Stress, Coping, Resilience and Health 161 Tony Cassidy

Chapter 8 The Utility of Coping: What we have Learned and How

we Can Develop Skills during Adolescence 201 Erica Frydenberg

Chapter 9 Clinical Psychology: A Psychoeducational Cognitive

Behavioural Approach to Helping People Cope 229 Claire Hayes

Contents viii

Chapter 10 The Utility of Biopsychosocial Models of Clinical Formulation

within Stress and Coping Theory and Applied Practice 261 Lynne Johnston, Andrew Hutchison and Barry Ingham

Contributors 293

Index 295

PREFACE

During the production of this book several significant events have occurred that highlight

the value of coping research, particularly that which seeks to apply theory to enhance the

health, well-being and performance of recipients. These events have included natural disasters

(e.g., flooding, earthquakes), civil unrest (e.g., as experienced in Libya and the Ivory Coast)

and a worldwide economic recession. Perhaps the worst natural disaster in recent history

occurred on March 11th

2011 when an earthquake measuring 8.9 in tremor magnitude hit

Japan, the fifth largest quake recorded since 1900. A resulting tsunami struck Japan reaching

10 kilometres (six miles) inland in places carrying houses, buildings, boats and cars with it.

The natural disaster also removed power to the Fukushima nuclear power plant. Without

power to cool nuclear fuel, steam began filling the station until a series of explosions

occurred. As a result, millions of gallons of radioactive water escaped into the Pacific Ocean.

Thousands of people living near the Fukushima nuclear power plant were ordered to evacuate

the area. The widespread destruction and suffering experienced by cities such as Sendai were

relayed on television screens around the world. More than 8,000 people died in the disaster,

thousands were injured with at least 12,000 missing. Many people were forced to live in

evacuation centres as 14,000 homes were destroyed and around 100,000 damaged. In the

aftermath of the earthquake the sense of loss amongst the Japanese community was palpable.

Communities were destroyed; individuals lost loved ones, residencies, possessions, health and

livelihoods.

Existing research is invaluable when looking to expedite the process of community and

individual coping following natural disasters. For example, following earthquakes

experienced in New Zealand (Canterbury 4th

September 2010 7.1-magnitude earthquake;

Canterbury 22nd

February 2001, 6.3-magnitude earthquake), the New Zealand ministry of

health published a series of factsheets intended to outline common responses to natural

disasters and to offer advice on personal coping and helping others, such as children, to cope

with the aftermath of an earthquake ( http://www.moh.govt.nz/moh.nsf/indexmh/coping-with-

stress accessed May 7th 2011). When examining the content of these factsheets, explicit

references to coping research are evidenced.

Such practices indicate that a strategy for developing coping interventions is to base them

in theory and research. In doing so it is then possible to test theoretical and applied

contentions refining them as appropriate thereby advancing knowledge further. This book is

intended to exemplify the application of theory in practice across a number of applied

domains. Appearing toward the beginning of each chapter is a section entitled Meet the

Tracey J. Devonport x

author. The purpose of the section is to enable authors to articulate their induction into their

particular field of coping research. Within this section authors may explicitly identify

theories, influential researchers, encounters and/or life experiences that have influenced their

own coping research and the resultant interpretation and application of information. It is

important to acknowledge experiences and theoretical beliefs because these may influence the

way in which information is presented. Within each chapter thoughts are offered with the

caveat that the associations offer readers a sense of links that I [we] intuitively make rather

than connections they should share. Moreover, it is hoped and expected that others will find

alternative associations (Gilbourne and Richardson, 2005, p. 328). I would encourage

readers to critically consider the way in which authors present and utilise theory and empirical

literature considering where there is agreement and where there is not. It is only through an

ongoing critical analysis of existing research, theory and practice that we will advance the

coping field and prevent stagnation. In order to facilitate critical thinking, readers are

provided with activity and focus boxes throughout the text regarding the application of coping

theory.

The book begins by outlining in chapter one the principles upon which this book is

founded, that is the importance of applying theory in practice. This is followed by a brief

overview of common classifications of coping theories. Chapters two, three and four explore

the application of stress and coping theory in three sporting contexts (respectively athlete,

sports officials and sports coaches). Each chapter highlights a different theoretical issue

debated within the coping literature concluding with a case study that exemplifies the

application of theory in practice. Exploring stress and coping research from three sporting

perspectives provides an opportunity to consider those demands faced by individuals

occupying different roles within a sporting context.

In chapter five Tony Cassidy presents literature exploring occupational stress. The

chapter begins by categorising work stressors thereafter exploring variables that influence

stress transactions. The positive elements of stress and coping are then explored before

unpacking coping interventions. Within chapter six Jennifer Brown looks at stress in policing.

The chapter presents the evolution of stress research from an area of research interest to one

that informed policy development and practice interventions. In chapter seven Tony Cassidy

focuses on stress, coping, resilience and health. Having defined stress, sources of stressors are

explored, this is followed by variables that influence stress transactions concluding

with coping interventions. In chapter eight Erica Frydenberg outlines the move from

considerations about stress to how we deal with stress; that is, coping. The latter part of the

chapter reports a selection of studies exploring coping and coping interventions. In chapter

nine Claire Hayes presents an overview of cognitive behavioural theory, research evidence

supporting its use in enhancing coping, and its application in practice.

Chapters two through nine conclude with a chapter review prepared by an expert in the

field and intended to draw out the key points which they derived from the chapter. The

rationale for the chapter review is to exemplify the interpretations of individuals

working/researching within the coping field. To what extent do you agree with these reviews?

What would you add given the chance? How would you take the information forward? These

are all questions I would encourage you to ask and endeavour to address.

Within chapter ten Lynne Johnston, Andrew Hutchison and Barry Ingham draw the book

to a close by proposing the use of case formulation as a clinical tool for use in the stress and

coping context. The chapter demonstrates how formulating individual case studies offers a

Preface xi

dynamic and holistic approach toward the development and implementation of practical

interventions. The authors indicate how the formulation process may help bridge the gap

between theory and practice by offering a means of appropriately linking interventions to

stress and coping theory.

I would like to thank all contributors for their theoretical, empirical and practical insights

into coping within different domains. Sharing these thoughts, arguments, data and personal

insights contributes to an enhanced understanding of stress and coping for both academics

and practitioners. The ultimate objective of this book is to bridge the gap between theory and

practice, and I believe that the contributors have helped achieve this. It is my hope that

readers will agree with this summary, enjoy reading the book, and that it provokes an

enhanced critical awareness of theory and its potential utility in applied practice. I would

welcome feedback from readers in informing future revisions to this text.

Tracey Devonport

University of Wolverhampton, United Kingdom

REFERENCES

Dewe, P., and Trenberth, L. (2004). Work stress and coping: Drawing together research and

practice. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 32, 143-156.

Gilbourne, D., and Richardson, D. (2005). A practitioner focused approach to the provision of

psychological support in soccer: Adopting action research themes and processes.

Journal of Sports Sciences, 23, 651-658

Lazarus, R. S. (2001). Stress and emotion: A new synthesis. Human Relations, 54, 792-803.

In: Managing Stress: From Theory to Application ISBN 978-1-61470-691-5

Editor: Tracey J. Devonport 2011 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 1

A BRIEF REVIEW OF COMMONLY USED

THEORIES AND THE IMPORTANCE OF APPLYING

THEORY IN PRACTICE

Tracey Devonport

University of Wolverhampton, United Kingdom

ABSTRACT

The chapter begins by outlining the importance of applying theory in practice. The

purpose is to set the context for the remaining chapters each of which endeavours to

exemplify the way in which theory can inform practice. The present chapter then offers a

summary of the most salient stress theories from distinct classifications, those being

stimulus-based; transactional-based and resource-based. It also presents a review of a

more recent theoretical framework, namely, proactive coping.

INTRODUCTION

There are many conceptualisations of stress and coping available. These conceptual-

isations have been applied in numerous domains resulting in a great volume of research. A

review of all relevant literatures is beyond the scope of this chapter, as such, the focus is on

presenting exemplars of distinct classifications of stress theories reported within the coping

literature.

Outlining the central tenants of coping theories offers an important contribution to the

coping literature as it enables researchers and practitioners to consider how these may be

applied in practice. Throughout this book readers will be encouraged to consider how theory

may be applied in their own applied research or practice.

Tracey Devonport 2

THE IMPORTANCE OF APPLYING THEORY IN PRACTICE

A criticism of coping research voiced by academics and practitioners alike is the lack of

applied research that strives to bridge the gap between theory and practice (Dewe

and Trenberth, 2004; Lazarus, 2001). Folkman (2009, p. 76) notes that in most coping

research what may ultimately be the most important translation - the translation to practice

is barely touched upon. Often those who do theory development or research consider the

translation from theory and research to practice to be another persons job. Theoretical

models provide the building blocks for coping intervention design, implementation and

provide a means for testing their effectiveness (Rutter and Quine, 2002). They do so by

helping to focus research questions and place them in a logical order, and by providing a

framework within which findings can be interpreted (Folkman, 2009). An intervention

programme or applied practice informed by theory is more likely to be effective (Michie,

Johnston, Francis, et al., 2008). Therefore, the challenge faced by coping researchers and

applied practitioners alike is to develop systematic approaches toward embedding theory in

practice (Michie et al., 2008).

The application of theory in applied research is important for three reasons:

1. Theory can improve intervention design and efficacy by focusing attention on

determinants of stressors and coping behaviours (Crosby, Kegler, and DiClemente,

2009; Michie et al., 2008). It is less likely that the effectiveness of interventions

targeting key determinants of coping behaviour (and utilising appropriate methods to

facilitate coping) will be rejected on the grounds of poor design or delivery (Green,

2000).

2. Theory can enhance the evaluation of an intervention by identifying possible

evaluation

indicators which can be ordered temporally thereby constructing a

proximaldistal chain of events (Green, 2000). Distinguishing between proximal and

distal indicators facilitates an evaluation of the relative magnitude of anticipated

change, which is generally greater in proximal indicators (e.g., change in beliefs)

than in more distal indicators (e.g., change in behaviour). This may minimise the risk

of failing to demonstrate change that has actually occurred as a result of the

intervention. This outcome typically results from research designs that are

insufficiently sensitive to detect change or those that focus on inappropriate variables

(Green, 2000).

3. Utilising theory to inform practice enables its practical utility to be evaluated by

practitioners across a range of contexts (Michie et al., 2008). By evaluating the

outcomes of theoretically derived interventions it is possible to corroborate or modify

theory accordingly.

STIMULUS-BASED MODELS

During a series of animal studies, endocrinologist Hans Selye (1956) observed a variety

of non-specific stimulus events which he referred to as stressors (e.g., heat, cold, toxic

agents), producing a response pattern he called the `General Adaptation Syndrome' (GAS).

Selye posits that the GAS proceeds in three stages; first, the alarm reaction comprises an

A Brief Review of Commonly Used Theories ... 3

initial shock phase and a subsequent countershock phase. The shock phase involves the

activation of the sympathetic nervous system. During the countershock phase defensive

processes are initiated as characterised by increased adrenocortical activity. In a second stage,

if a stressor endures the organism enters the stage of resistance. In this stage, the symptoms of

the alarm reaction disappear, which seemingly indicates the organism's adaptation to the

stressor. However, while resistance to the stressor increases, resistance to other kinds of

stressors decreases due to the organisms depleted energies and resources. Finally, if the

stressor persists, resistance gives way to stage three, the stage of exhaustion. When the

organism's capability of adapting to the stressor is exhausted, the symptoms of the first stage

reappear, but resistance is no longer possible as energies and resources are depleted.

Irreversible tissue damage appears and if the stressor continues to persist the organism

eventually dies (Selye, 1993).

Selye (1974, 1983, 1993) modified the GAS recognising that while stress could result in

significant harm to the biological system, an absence of stress could also be harmful. From

this Selye made the distinction between distress and eustress. He proposed that distress

results from persistent demands that cannot be resolved through adaptation leading to

diminished performance, negative feelings, and biological damage. Eustress occurs when the

biological system possesses the energies and resources to adapt to demands leading to

enhanced functioning, positive feelings, and human growth. Selye found that eustress

presented little or no risk to the biological system concluding that this represents a positive

aspect of stress. Within these modifications Selye acknowledged that the characteristics

and/or perceptions of an event can influence the stress response. He also proposed that

psychological arousal could be, and indeed was, one of the most frequent activators of the

GAS response (Selye, 1983). However, Seyle did not alter his basic theoretical premise that

stress was a physiological phenomenon. He perceived the psychological components to be

beyond his field of competence and called for his proposals to be further examined by those

appropriately qualified (Tache and Selye, 1985).

Criticism of Selye's work has been directed at the theory's core assumption of a

nonspecific causation of the GAS and the failure to distinguish triggers for the stress reaction

(Furnham, 1997). A second criticism was that unlike the physiological stress investigated by

Selye in animals, stress experienced by humans is almost always the result of a cognitive

mediation (Lazarus, 1966; Lyon, 2000). Stimulus based models offer an overly simplistic

view of stressors or demands as existing somewhere objectively outside the person, and an

equally simplistic view that the person reacts passively to these demands through a process of

coping. What evolved from criticisms of the stimulus-based models was the idea that stress

occurred when environmental demands and individual susceptibilities interacted as opposed

to a simplistic reaction.

TRANSACTIONAL-BASED MODELS

Transactional models contend that the way in which an individual interprets a stressor

determines how they respond to in terms of emotional reactions, behavioural responses, and

coping efforts. An individuals interpretation is influenced by factors such as personal and

social resources as well as characteristics of the stressful experience. Thus, transactional

models contend that the outcomes of a stressful encounter are determined by many factors.

Tracey Devonport 4

Whilst many versions of this basic transactional model have been proposed it is the

Transactional Model of Stress and Coping (TMSC: Lazarus and Folkman, 1984) later revised

to the Cognitive Motivational Relational Theory (CMRT: Lazarus, 1991a, 1999, 2000) that

has been the guiding theory for a great deal of coping research (Aldwin, 1994; Frydenberg

and Lewis, 2004).

Lazarus and Folkman presented the TMSC in their book Stress, appraisal and coping

(Lazarus and Folkman, 1984), and since that time it has been further developed and refined.

The TMSC conceives a reciprocal, bi-directional relational process between the person and

the environment which transact to form new meanings through appraisal processes. Cognitive

appraisal is the evaluation of the significance of what is happening in the person-environment

relationship. Lazarus and Folkman (1984) proposed that the cognitive appraisal of a stressor

involves both primary and secondary appraisals which occur at virtually the same time and

interact to determine the significance and meaning of events with regards to well-being.

During primary appraisal, an individual considers the significance of a situation with regard

to his or her own values, personal beliefs, situational intentions, goal commitments and well-

being (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984). These mechanisms of primary appraisal result in an

event being interpreted in one of three ways; 1) irrelevant, where there are no implications for

well-being, 2) benign/positive/beneficial, where the event is perceived to preserve or enhance

well-being, and 3) stressful, where there is a perceived harm/loss, threat and/or challenge to

well-being. Appraisals of harm/loss are characterised by perceptions that damage has already

been sustained. A threat appraisal occurs when harm or loss are possible. A challenge

appraisal reflects a perception that there may be an opportunity for mastery and gain (Lazarus

and Folkman, 1984). Coping is only required following events that are perceived as stressful

and as such benign or positive appraisals do not require coping responses (Anshel and

Delany, 2001). The primary appraisals of harm/loss, threat or challenge are not mutually

exclusive, thus it is possible for an individual to appraise an event in more than one way at the

same time. For example, an individual may appraise an impending exam as both a threat and

challenge. An exam may be appraised as a challenge because it offers an opportunity to

demonstrate knowledge, competency, and attain course credits. The same exam may also be

appraised as a threat because the individual must pass the exam in order to progress with their

studies, and attain a particular grade to meet their personal goals. The individual may fear that

they may not perform as well as they believe themselves to be capable of thus presenting the

potential for loss/harm.

Secondary appraisal refers to a cognitive-evaluative process that focuses on minimising

harm or maximising gains through coping responses. This involves an evaluation of coping

options and available resources that may include social, physical, psychological and material

assets (Lazarus, 1999; Lazarus and Folkman, 1984). Wells and Matthews (1994) describe this

level of processing as the principal determinant of coping and stress reactions, enabling the

identification of coping procedures that match the immediate situation. Perceived control over

events is considered during secondary appraisal as the individual decides what can or cannot

be done to manage specific external and/or internal demands that are appraised as surpassing

a persons resources (Burns and Egan, 1994). An individuals confidence in their ability to

execute courses of action or attain specific performance outcomes (Bandura, 1977, 1986,

1997) is also evident during secondary appraisal as they influence task selection and the effort

expended in task completion. This has implications for the coping outcome; it is not enough

to possess the skills of competent coping alone. Not only must an individual believe they


have coping skills, they must also be confident to use them when the situation demands their

use (Roskies and Lazarus, 1980). Following a coping response, the outcome is reviewed or

re-appraised (tertiary appraisal or reappraisal) and another coping response may follow.

Lazarus presented conceptual developments from the early TMSC to the Cognitive-

Motivational-Relational theory of emotions (CMRT) in his books Emotion and adaptation

(Lazarus, 1991b) and Passion and reason: Making sense of our emotions (Lazarus and

Lazarus, 1994). While TMSC is centred on psychological states experienced during

transactions between the person and the environment in situations appraised as taxing or

exceeding resources and/or endangering well-being (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984), the CMRT

is focused on emotion. CMRT suggests that emotions arise from the relational meaning of an

encounter between a person and the environment. An emotion is elicited by appraisals of

environmental demands, constraints, and resources, and also by their juxtaposition with a

persons motives and beliefs. Each emotion involves a different core relational theme

(Lazarus 1991a, 1991b, 1991c) as each emotion is brought about by appraisal of the personal

significance of an encounter.

Lazarus suggested that approximately 15 different emotions (Lazarus 1991a, 1991b) can

be identified. Nine he described as goal incongruent emotions, namely; anger, fright, anxiety,

guilt, shame, sadness, envy, jealousy and disgust. Four he termed goal congruent emotions,

namely; happiness, pride, relief and love, and three emotions whose valence he described as

equivocal or mixed: hope, compassion and gratitude. Table 1.1 presents core relational

themes for each of these emotions as suggested by Lazarus (1991b, p. 13).

Table 1.1. Core relational themes for emotions (Lazarus, 1991b, p. 13)

Emotion Core relational themes

Anger A demeaning offense against me and mine

Anxiety Facing uncertain, existential threat

Fright An immediate, concrete, and overwhelming physical danger

Guilt Having transgressed a moral imperative

Shame Failing to live up to an ego-ideal

Sadness Having experienced an irrevocable loss

Envy Wanting what someone else has

Jealousy Resenting a third party for the loss of, or a threat to, anothers affection or favour

Disgust Taking in or being too close to an indigestible object or (metaphorically

speaking) idea

Happiness Making reasonable progress toward the realisation of a goal

Pride Enhancement of ones ego-identity by taking credit for a valued object or achievement, either ones own or that of someone or group with whom one identifies

Relief A distressing goal-incongruent condition that has changed for the better or gone

away

Hope Fearing the worst but wanting better

Love Desiring or participating in affection, usually but not necessarily reciprocated

Compassion Being moved by anothers suffering and wanting to help

With reference to the core relational themes, the CMRT suggests that, for each emotion,

there are at most six appraisal-related decisions to make, sometimes less, creating a rich and

Tracey Devonport 6

diverse cognitive pattern with which to describe the relational meanings which distinguish

any emotion from each of the others. (Lazarus, 1991b, p. 216). Three are primary appraisal

components including: goal relevance (the extent to which an encounter relates to personal

goals); goal congruence or incongruence (the extent to which a transaction is consistent or

inconsistent with what the person wants); and type of ego involvement (consideration of

diverse aspects of ego-identity or personal commitments). The remaining three are secondary

appraisal components including: an evaluation of blame or credit (establishing where possible

who or what is accountable or responsible); coping potential (if and how the demands can be

managed by the individual); and future expectations (whether for any reason, things are likely

to change becoming more or less goal congruent). The specific combination of primary and

secondary appraisals is proposed to influence the intensity and type of emotion elicited. In

addition to appraisals, how the individual copes with situations or events will also mediate the

type and intensity of emotions they experience (Lazarus, 1991a, 1991b, 1991c).

Essentially, the TMSC and CMRT are both structured around transactions between: 1)

antecedent variables (environmental variables such as demands, resources and constraints,

and personality variables such as motives and beliefs about the self and the world); 2)

mediating processes (appraisal, core relational themes, and coping processes); and 3)

outcomes (acute outcomes such as immediate emotions, and long-term outcomes such as

chronic emotional patterns, well-being, and physical health).

CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES THEORY

Hobfoll (2001) contends that the majority of work utilising Lazarus transactional theory

focuses on the appraisal aspects, which is only one component of the stress process. Within

his Conservation of Resource theory (COR: Hobfoll, 1989, 2001) Hobfoll suggests that

resource loss is central to the stress process. Stress is a reaction to an environment in which

there is the threat of a loss of resources, an actual loss in resources, or failure to gain

sufficient or expected resources following significant resource investment (Grandey and

Cropanzano, 1999). Freund and Riediger (2001, p. 373) defined resources as the actual or

potential means for achieving personal goals. They assert that, that which constitutes a

resource can only be defined with regards to a specific goal. Resources may include objects,

conditions, personal characteristics, and energies (Hobfoll, 2001; Grandey and Cropanzano,

1999). Hobfoll (2001) suggested that whilst cognitive appraisals are one means to assess

resource loss, most resources are objectively determined and observable.

Two main principles accompany COR, the primacy of resource loss and resource

investment. The primacy of resource loss principle contends that given equal amounts of loss

and gain, loss will have significantly greater impact in health outcomes, emotional

experience, and stress reactions. When individuals experience a chronic lack of resources,

they are more vulnerable to further loss of resources (Freedy and Hobfoll, 1994). In essence,

those with fewer resources fall behind to a greater extent than those who begin with more

resources. Hobfoll (1989, 2001) describes this phenomenon as resource loss and resource gain

spirals. Resource loss can lead to further loss in resources, conditions that should cause higher

vulnerability. On the other hand, resources gains could result in further gains, so that people

might tend to be less vulnerable.


The resource investment principle considers what people invest to protect against

resource loss, to recover from losses, and to gain resources. According to Hobfoll, people

must invest resources in order to protect against resource loss, recover from losses and gain

resources (2001, p. 349). This implies that individuals can take proactive steps in advance of

the occurrence of anticipated stress and thereby gain resources that reduce their vulnerability

to the effects of threatened or actual future resource loss (Freedy and Hobfoll, 1994). COR

postulates that having one resource is linked to having others; similarly, lacking one resource

is linked to lacking others (Hobfoll, 1998). Resource investment should moderate successful

adaptation by increasing the possibility of secondary gains, and consequently reducing the

prevalence of chronic and acute resource losses. Under resourced individuals are highly

defensive and motivated to conserve resources and protect against a loss of resources.

Freund and Riediger (2001) argue that the CORs notion of resources loss may not be

applied to those resources that can be used simultaneously for a variety of purposes or

activities and that are not depleted after usage. Such resources include self-efficacy beliefs,

self-esteem, and personality factors, which are not depleted through usage in a way that

commodities such as money are. Freund and Riediger (2001, p. 374) remark that the

distinction between naturally finite resources and characteristics that influence the efficiency

of use those finite resources to be very useful, as it helps to more clearly address the question

whether it is the availability of resources, the way of using these resources, or the interaction

of both that impacts how successfully individuals manage their lives.

Schwarzer (2001) conceptualised differences between the COR and TMSC as minimal

suggesting that differences are a matter of degree and emphasis rather than a matter of

principle. Hobfoll reduces Lazarus approach to a highly subjective appraisal theory and

argues that objective resources are more important. Although cognitive appraisal is the key

feature in the TMSC, it also presents a model of a stress episode starting with objective

antecedents, including resources, and ending with more or less adaptive outcomes such as

health and well-being (Schwarzer, 2001). Hobfoll (2001) argued that in terms of resource

investment, the proactive coping theory (Aspinwall and Taylor, 1997; Greenglass et al., 1999)

aligns more closely with the COR since it proposes that the stress process it is not restricted to

the reactive response to resource losses or threats, but to efforts oriented towards acquiring

and maintaining resources. Individuals respond to early warning signals of impeding

problems and position themselves into circumstances that fit their resources or place them at

an advantage. However, Hobfoll (1989, 2001) does not recognise the role attributed to

appraisal (i.e., challenge appraisal) as recognised by the proactive coping theories that are

cited as aligning with COR.

PROACTIVE COPING THEORIES

In the stress and coping literature, coping has traditionally been conceived as activities

undertaken to master, tolerate, reduce, or minimise environmental or intrapsychic demands

perceived as a potential threat, harm or loss. Two theoretical frameworks have been

developed that focus on future oriented coping as opposed to reactive coping, namely, the

Proactive Coping Theory of Schwarzer (2000) and the Proactive Coping Theory of Aspinwall

and Taylor (1997). Whilst Aspinwall and Taylor (1997) posit that proactive coping is a

process through which one prepares for potential future stressors, possibly averting them

Tracey Devonport 8

altogether, Schwarzer (2000) assert that proactive coping is a method of assessing future

goals and developing strategies to achieve them successfully. The fundamental similarity in

these definitions is the notion that proactive coping is a general readiness for an indeterminate

future that incorporates both coping and self-regulatory skills (Aspinwall, 2005). The

distinction between the two is that Aspinwall and Taylor (1997) frame the ambiguous future

negatively in that one must anticipate and prevent what may go wrong, whereas Schwarzer

(2000) frames it more positively, as a challenge for which one must prepare to ensure that

personal goals are attained. Further details regarding each theory are outlined below.

Aspinwall and Taylors Proactive Coping Theory

Aspinwall and Taylor (1997) define proactive coping as efforts undertaken in advance of

a potentially stressful event to prevent it or to modify its form before it occurs. They

distinguish between reactive coping, anticipatory coping, and proactive coping as follows:

Reactive coping is the result of threat, harm, or loss experiences, and it aims at mastering,

tolerating, reducing, or minimising environmental or intrapsychic demands resulting from

them; Anticipatory coping involves preparation for the stressful consequences of an

upcoming event whose occurrence is likely or certain (Aspinwall and Taylor, 1997).

Proactive coping, occurs temporally prior to reactive coping and anticipatory coping, and

involves the accumulation of resources and the acquisition of skills that are not designated to

face any particular stressor.

Proactive coping as defined by Aspinwall and Taylor (1997) is proposed to have many

benefits, including reducing the impact of a stressful event should it occur, enhancing

versatility in managing an event by affording the time to develop a range of strategies, and

possibly averting a stressful event altogether. In this conceptualisation, proactive coping is a

construct thought to describe how self-regulation is applied to preparing for future stressors.

This involves developing skills intended to manage potential stressors and to reduce their

negative effects.

Aspinwall and Taylor (1997) propose a five-stage conceptual framework of proactive

coping that consists of: 1) resource accumulation in which the person builds resources and

skills in advance of any specific anticipated stress; 2) recognition of potential stressors in

which environmental dangers and arising threats are screened; 3) initial appraisal or

preliminary assessments procedures, through which a person identifies potential stressful

interactions. The appraisal of the situation may increase attention and may motivate initial

coping efforts; 4) preliminary coping efforts that involve cognitive/behavioural activities such

as planning, seeking information, and taking preliminary actions; and 5) elicitation and use of

feedback concerning initial coping efforts and their impact upon the development of the

stressful event. The person evaluates whether previous efforts were successful and the extent

to which additional coping efforts are required.

Aspinwall and Taylor (1997) argued that an important first step in effective proactive

coping is the preservation and accumulation of resources such as time, acquisition of

proactive coping skills, the establishment of a social network and social support. At the

recognition stage, several trait related characteristics, such as vigilance, sensitisation,

monitoring, repression, dispositional optimism, and hypervigilance are relevant in the

detection of potential stressors. Social networks are also influential in terms of the detection


of warning signs, either to reduce or to increase perceived risks. With reference to the initial

appraisal stage of proactive coping, both personality factors (e.g., optimism, self-efficacy,

hardiness, trait anxiety, self-esteem, constructive thinking) and situational conditions (e.g.,

perceived controllability) are conceived to be key ingredients. From initial appraisal to

preliminary coping efforts, situational determinants such as perceived manageability of the

situation, perceived changeability, perceived controllability, as well as perceived coping

potential may influence coping actions. At the final stage of proactive coping (elicitation and

use of feedback), both personality traits and situational factors are assumed to facilitate or

impede the use of feedback. For example, people with favourable beliefs in their abilities may

not recognise their personal limits and confront situations for which they are unprepared

thereby increasing the potential for failure rather than success. In terms of situational factors,

several studies on adaptation to chronic stressors suggest that people hold different

perceptions of control over different aspects of the interaction (Aspinwall and Taylor, 1997).

With regard to social support networks, significant others are very important regarding the

provision and the interpretation of feedback, for example when asking others: How did I do?

Or Did I overreact?

Schwarzer and Colleagues Proactive Coping Theory

Schwarzer and Taubert (2002) also distinguish proactive coping from reactive coping,

anticipatory coping and preventive coping. They differentiate between them by their temporal

location in the coping process and the level of certainty they involve (Schwarzer and

Luszczynska, 2008). In their framework, proactive coping is directed toward future

indeterminate events, whereas reactive coping is directed toward past or presently

experienced events (certain events) to deal with or to compensate for harm or loss. Proactive

coping is also purported to take place before anticipatory coping. Anticipatory coping occurs

before an event that is certain or fairly certain to occur in the near future to manage threats,

attain challenges, maximise benefits or a combination of them. Proactive coping occurs when

the stressor to be encountered is less certain than the stressors that elicit reactive coping or

anticipatory coping. However, proactive coping and preventive coping are comparable with

respect to their temporal position relative to a stressor and the level of certainty regarding that

stressor. Preventative coping involves efforts to build general resistance resources to cope

with an event that may or may not occur in the distant future whilst proactive coping involves

efforts to build up general resources aiming at confronting challenging goals and promoting

personal growth.

Schwarzer and Taubert (2002) specify that proactive coping is based on preparing for

possible positive appraisals of the future, whereas preventive coping is based on preparing for

possible negative appraisals of the future. Given that proactive coping is not preceded by

negative appraisals, such as harm, loss or threat, the person has a more positive outlook of life

demands. Therefore, they define proactive coping as an effort to build up general resources

that facilitate promotion toward challenging goals and personal growth as opposed to

preventive coping that aims to build up general resistance resources that result in less strain

in the future by minimising the severity of the impact, with less severe consequences of

stress, should it occur, or a less likely onset of stressful events in the first place (Schwarzer

and Taubert, 2002, p. 27). In this conceptualisation, a proactive coper will tend to appraise

Tracey Devonport 10

stressors as challenges and worry less, whereas a preventive coper will tend to appraise

stressors as threats and worry more (Greenglass, 2002; Greenglass and Fiksenbaum, 2009).

Regardless of these appraisals and levels of worry, it is proposed that proactive coping and

preventive coping manifest a similar set of skills. This definition of proactive coping is

distinguished by three features: 1) It integrates planning and preventive strategies with

proactive self-regulatory goal attainment, 2) it integrates proactive goal attainment with

identification and utilisation of social resources, and 3) it utilises proactive emotional coping

for self-regulatory goal attainment (Greenglass, 2002, p. 41).

Proactive coping may be influenced by personal attributes such as self-efficacy, and

proactive attitude. Proactive coping may be considered to be function of self-efficacy beliefs

which influence motivation and volition by increasing a persons perceived capabilities to

engage and maintain long-term courses of action. A proactive attitude may conducive for

proactive coping since it appears to be a key factor in goal oriented actions influencing the

type and difficulty of goals, configuring intentions, and influencing the initiation and

maintenance of goal oriented actions (Schmitz and Schwarzer, 1999).

CONCLUSION

This chapter outlines the importance of applying theory in practice and offers examples

of stress theories. In concluding this chapter, the importance of underpinning practice with

theory cannot be emphasised strongly enough. Practitioners should give due consideration to

coping theory and empirical literature before designing and implementing intervention

programmes or applied work. Systematically embedding theory in practice will inform the

design of interventions/applied work, provide a means for testing their effectiveness and

ultimately increase the likelihood of efficacious outcomes.

REFERENCES

Anshel, M. H., and Delany, J. (2001). Sources of acute stress, cognitive appraisals, and

coping strategies of male and female child athletes. Journal of Sport Behavior, 24, 329-

353.

Aspinwall, L. G. (2005). The psychology of future-oriented thinking: From achievement to

proactive coping, adaptation, and aging. Motivation and Emotion, 29, 203-235.

Aspinwall, L. G., and Taylor, S. E. (1997). A stitch in time: Self- regulation and proactive

coping. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 417-436.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.

Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.

Burns, K. R., and Egan, E. C. (1994). Description of a stressful encounter: Appraisal, threat

and challenge. Journal of Nursing Education, 33, 21-28.

Crosby, R. A., Kegler, M., and DiClemente, R. J. (2009). Theory in health promotion practice

and research. In DiClemente, R. J., Crosby, R. A., and Kegler, M. (Eds.), Emerging


theories in health promotion practice and research (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-

Bass Wiley.

Dewe, P., and L. Trenberth. (2004). Work stress and coping: Drawing together research and

practice. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 32, 144-156.

Folkman, S. (2009). Commentary on the special section Theory-based approaches to stress

and coping: Questions, answers, issues, and next steps in stress and coping research.

European Psychologist, 14, 72-77.

Freedy, J. R., and Hobfoll, S. E. (1994). Stress inoculation for reduction of burnout: A

conservation of resources approach. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping: An International

Journal, 6, 311-325.

Freund, A. M., and Riediger, M. (2001). What I have and what I do: The role of resource loss

and gain throughout life. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 50, 370-380.

Furnham, A. (1997). The psychology of behaviour at work: The individual in the

organization. Hove, England UK: Taylor and Francis.

Grandey, A. A., and Cropanzano, R. (1999). The conservation of resources model applied to

workfamily conflict and strain. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 350370.

Green, J. (2000). The role of theory in evidence-based health promotion practice, Health

Education Research, 15, 125-129.

Greenglass, E. R. (2002). Proactive coping and quality of life management. In Frydenberg, E.

(Ed.), Beyond coping: Meeting goals, visions and challenges (pp. 37-62). New York,

Oxford University Press.

Greenglass, E. R., and Fiksenbaum, L. (2009). Proactive coping, positive affect, and well-

being: Theoretical and empirical considerations. European Psychologist, 14, 2939.

Greenglass, E. R., Schwarzer, R., and Taubert, S. (1999). The Proactive Coping Inventory

(PCI): A multidimensional research instrument. [On- line publication]. Available at:

http://www.psych.yorku.ca/greenglass/

Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress.

American Psychologist, 44, 513-524.

Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested-self in the stress

process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. Applied Psychology: An

International Review, 50, 337-370.

Hobfoll, S. E., and Lilly, R. S. (1993). Resource conservation as a strategy for community

psychology. Journal of Community Psychology, 21, 128-148.

Lazarus, R. S. (1966). Psychological stress and the coping process. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Lazarus, R. S. (1991a). Progress on a cognitive-motivational-relational theory of emotion.

American Psychologist, 46, 819-834.

Lazarus, R. S. (1991b). Emotion and adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press.

Lazarus, R. S. (1991c). Cognition and motivation in emotion. American Psychologist, 46,

352-367.

Lazarus, R. S. (1999). Stress and emotion: A new synthesis. New York: Springer.

Lazarus, R. S. (2000). Cognitive-motivational-relational theory of emotion. In Y. L. Hanin

(Ed.), Emotions in sport (pp. 3963). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Lazarus, R. (2001). Stress and emotion: A new synthesis. Human Relations, 54, 792-803

Lazarus, R., and Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York: Springer.

Lazarus, R. and Lazarus, B. (1994), Passion and reason: Making sense of our emotions. New

York: Oxford University Press.

Tracey Devonport 12

Lyon, B. L. (2000). Stress, coping and health. A conceptual overview. In V. H. Rice (Ed.),

Handbook of stress, coping and health: Implications for nursing research, theory and

practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Michie, S., Johnston, M., Francis, J., Hardeman, W., and Eccles, M. (2008). From theory to

intervention: Mapping theoretically derived behavioural determinants to behaviour

change techniques. Applied Psychology: An international review, 57, 660-680.

Roskies, E., and Lazarus, R. S. (1980). Coping theory and the teaching of coping skills. In S.

M. Davidson (Ed.), Behavioural medicine: Changing health life styles. New York:

Brunner and Mazel.

Rutter, D. R., and Quine, L. (2002). Social cognition models and changing health behaviours.

In D. R. Rutter and L. Quine (Eds.), Changing health behaviour: Intervention and

research with social cognition models (pp. 1-27). Buckingham: Open University Press.

Schmitz, G. S., and Schwarzer, R. (1999). Teachers' proactive attitude: Construct description

and psychometric analyses. Zeitschrift fur Empirische Padagogik, 13, 3-27.

Schwarzer, R. (2000). Manage stress at work through preventative and proactive coping. In E.

A. Locke (Ed.), The Blackwell handbook of principles of organizational behavior (pp.

342-355). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.

Schwarzer, R. (2001). Stress, resources, and proactive coping. Applied Psychology: An

International Journal, 50, 400-407.

Schwarzer, R., and Taubert, S. (2002). Tenacious goal pursuits and striving toward personal

growth: Proactive coping. In E. Frydenberg (Ed.), Beyond coping: Meeting goals, visions

and challenges (pp. 19-35). London: Oxford University Press.

Schwarzer, R., and Luszczynska, A. (2008). Reactive, anticipatory, preventive and proactive

coping: A theoretical distinction. The Prevention Researcher, 15, 22-24.

Selye, H. (1956). The Stress of Life. Toronto: McGraw-Hill.

Selye, H. (1974). Stress without distress. Philadelphia: Lippincott Co.

Selye, H. (1983). The stress concept: Past, present, and future. In C. L. Cooper (Ed.), Stress

research: Issues for the eighties (pp. 120). New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.

Selye, H. (1993). History of stress concept. In L. Goldberger and S. Breznitz (Eds.),

Handbook of stress: Theoretical and clinical aspects (2nd ed.) (pp. 7-17). New York: The

Free Press.

Tache, J., and Selye, H. (1985). On stress and coping mechanisms. Issues in Mental Health

Nursing, 7, 324.

Wells, A., and Matthews, G. (1994). Attention and emotion. London: Erlbaum.

In: Managing Stress: From Theory to Application ISBN 978-1-61470-691-5

Editor: Tracey J. Devonport 2011 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 2

THE UTILITY OF STRESS AND COPING THEORY

WHEN WORKING WITH ATHLETES

Tracey Devonport University of Wolverhampton, United Kingdom

ABSTRACT

The present chapter explores stressors and coping amongst competitive sports

participants. The intention is to consider the utility of theory and empirical literature in

informing the construction of coping interventions for use with this population. To

initiate the chapter, I will offer a brief account of my own experiences and influences

pertinent to the study of stress and coping. The purpose of this is to offer readers a sense

of links that I intuitively make rather than connections they should share. This is followed

by a review of research that has explored stressors and resultant coping amongst athletes.

In reviewing the coping literature, meaningful propositions presented within coping

theory will identified and a sample of these will be highlighted to establish the

implications for interventions intended to enhance coping. Finally, a case study

exemplifying a theory driven coping intervention will be offered. The chapter will

conclude with recommendations intended to advance applied research within the coping

domain.

OVERVIEW OF SPORT COPING CHAPTERS TWO TO FOUR

Chapters two through four explore the application of stress and coping theory in sporting

contexts. Each chapter presents stressors and coping identified by a different sporting

population. They then explore the utility of theory in constructing and delivering coping

interventions intended for use with the respective population. Whilst a number of theoretical

propositions are explored, each chapter explores one or more issue in greater depth.

Chapter two explores literature pertaining to the experiences of athletes, athletes being

the most heavily researched population within a sporting context. This chapter explores the

contribution of process definitions of stress toward conceptual clarity and resulting

measurement implications. Hobfolls Conservation of Resource Theory (Hobfoll, 1989, 2001)

Tracey Devonport 14

and the future oriented coping literature, in particular proactive coping (Aspinwall, 2005;

Aspinwall and Taylor, 1997; Greenglass and Fiksenbaum, 2009; Schwarzer and Taubert,

2002) are presented as areas largely neglected in sport coping research. Finally, the merits of

undertaking a holistic approach toward the evaluation of stress and coping, and efforts to

generalise coping across contexts are also explored.

Chapter three examines stress and coping as reported amongst sports officials. The

chapter utilises pertinent literature to explore the influence of personal and situational factors

on appraisal and also upon coping effectiveness. Literature exploring dispositional and

situational coping is presented along with implications for the measurement of coping.

Finally, chapter four reviews the stress and coping literature conducted amongst sports

coaches. The impact of stress definitions on conceptual clarity and measurement are outlined

focusing on the distinction between stress and strain.

Lazarus (1999, 2000a) has identified the need to develop a more complete understanding

of the unique and contextually situated demands that different population groups face.

Exploring stress and coping research from three sporting perspectives provides an opportunity

to explore those demands faced by individuals occupying different roles within a sporting

context.

INTRODUCTION

The future of sport arguably lies in the extent to which athletes can be nurtured to fulfil

their potential. Sport and exercise psychologists working with athletes should seek ways to

facilitate their performance in sport in part through an exploration of the stressors athletes

encounter and the strategies used to cope with such stressors. In addition to those stressors

relating directly to the sport organisation (selection pressures, personal performance) athletes

may at the same time be experiencing academic, employment and social stressors (Devonport

and Lane 2009a, 2009b). In an example provided by Rebecca Adlington, she reflected upon

the stressors resulting from performance success, and also makes clear references to stressors

encountered beyond sport that impact upon her sports experience. Rebecca is a British

freestyle swimmer who won two gold medals at the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games in the 400

meters and 800 meters. On the 18th

December 2009 she recorded a television interview with

the British Broadcasting Corporation prior to an international competition (http://www.bbc.

co.uk/blogs/olliewilliams/2009/12/adlingtons_phelps_awe_highligh.shtml accessed March

18th 2011). Within this interview she comments, I'm not going to get all depressed on you

and start crying! But it's been a hard year personally...It's been hard for me to deal with

everything after Beijing, like being recognised, and there are other things like moving house

and personal situations, and your swimming gets affected by that... Growing up, it's hard

enough to deal with change in your twenties anyway, with your body shape, and changing as

a woman, let alone as a swimmer as well. My body shape has changed a little bit and when

you get older you can't necessarily do all the work you did when you were 16. And moving

house at the same time was difficult, especially moving out of the family home. It's very

different living on your own but I still love it.

It is important that athletes such as Rebecca are supported in coping with stressors within

and beyond sport. Research suggests that an inability to cope with stress can result in poor

psychological, social and physical functioning (Frydenberg and Lewis, 2004).

The Utility of Stress and Coping Theory ... 15

MEET THE AUTHOR

I have two great passions in life, interacting with people and pursuing/ being involved in

sport. It was whilst watching the Los Angeles Olympics (1984) that I determined I could

combine both interests by seeking to become a Sport Psychologist. In the early 1980s this

career path was relatively unknown, but I was driven by an interest in identifying factors that

influence sport performance with a view to using this information to help performers

maximise their potential. I was cognisant that one barrier to achieving sporting potential was

the way in which individuals appraised and managed those challenges encountered whilst

pursuing their sports aspirations. From such observations I intuitively generated hypothesis

about my own and others response to stressors. As my career as a sport and exercise

psychologist progressed my desire to empirically explore stress and coping intensified. I

suspect that many individuals select their research focus based upon similar principles. In

most instances theories emerge from a combination of personal intuition, systematic

observation and analytical thinking (Siegrist, 1998, 2000).

It was in 1998 when the opportunity arose for my interest in coping to become a focus of

research. I was working as a sport science support assistant with England netball,

predominantly working with under-seventeen and under-nineteen talent players. Talent

players were those who had the possibility, subject to selection, of representing England

during junior international competitions. There were 20 members of each age group, of which

12 from each were selected for international competition. In supporting these young athletes

as they sought to develop their playing potential, I would spend time with them at training

camps, and in between camps I would maintain contact via telephone. In speaking with them

and establishing their trust, it became apparent that many of them struggled to manage

combined commitments including academic, social, work and high level sport. I observed a

trend whereby dropout from the talent programme peaked amongst the under-nineteen group.

I was keen to establish why, and sought to explore the coping experiences of this population.

What followed was a four-year applied research programme working with England netball

and junior national players. The longitudinal nature of this research enabled me to capture the

coping transactions of players over an extended period of time. As will be outlined in a case

study that appears later in this chapter, exploratory data, empirical evidence and theory were

all utilised to inform applied work undertaken with junior national netball players partaking in

the England netball talent development programme.

In exploring the stress and coping phenomena, an enduring theoretical influence is the

work of Richard Lazarus. I have used, and continue to utilise the Transactional Model

(Lazarus and Folkman, 1984) and the subsequent Cognitive-Motivational-Relational theory

(Lazarus, 1991, 1999, 2000c) to inform my research and applied practice. Hobfolls

Conservation of Resource Theory (Hobfoll, 1989, 2001) and the future oriented coping

literature, in particular proactive coping (Aspinwall, 2005; Aspinwall and Taylor, 1997;

Greenglass and Fiksenbaum, 2009; Schwarzer and Taubert, 2002) has also been influential.

Finally, as much of my work is applied in nature, I am cognisant that few researchers have

sufficiently detailed the content of coping interventions that are purported to be theory led.

One researcher that defies this trend is Erica Frydenberg, as such her work has also remained

influential. The influence of these theorists and researchers will be evidenced across chapters

two and three.

Tracey Devonport 16

STRESSORS ENCOUNTERED AMONGST ATHLETES

Enhancing practitioners understanding of the salient demands faced by athletes, and

identifying those factors that contribute to the successful management of them, would provide

a sound empirical basis for the development of coping interventions to meet the needs of this

population group (Bartholomew, Parcel, and Kok, 1998; Folkman and Moskowitz, 2004). It is

commonly accepted that the competitive sports environment is characterised by situations of

intense pressure (Hanton, Fletcher, and Coughlan, 2005), and if individuals are unable to

effectively cope with such pressures they are likely to experience poor performance, feel

dissatisfied with their experiences, and possibly drop out of sport (Sagar, Lavallee, and Spray,

2009; Voight, 2009). Practitioners need to understand the environments in which athletes

operate, and be aware of the stressors experienced in order to help identify appropriate coping

behaviours (Lazarus, 1999).

To date, sport coping research has mainly been concerned with elite amateur athletes

perceptions of stressors and coping responses at major competitions (e.g., Calmeiro,

Tenenbaum, and Eccles, 2010; Dale, 2000; Dugdale, Eklund, and Gordon, 2002). Stressors

commonly identified by athletes include performance expectations (Thelwell, Weston, and

Greenlees, 2007), making a mental or physical error (Gould, Eklund, and Jackson, 1993a),

unexpected disruptions (Gould, Finch, and Jackson, 1993b), competition preparation issues

(McKay, Niven, Lavallee, and White, 2008), not performing to required standard (Reeve,

Nicholls, and McKenna, 2009), suffering pain or injury (Nicholls, Holt, Polman, and

Bloomfield, 2006), playing status (Thelwell et al., 2007), the pressure of competition (McKay

et al., 2008), physical/mental difficulties (Weston, Thelwell, Bond, and Hutchings, 2009),

self-doubts about talent (Scanlan, Stein, and Ravizza, 1991), technique issues (Thelwell et al.,

2007), self-presentational concerns (McKay et al., 2008), superstitions (Hanton et al., 2005),

observing an opponent play well or cheat (Nicholls et al., 2006), receiving a wrong call from

officials (Reeve et al., 2009), selection issues (Thelwell et al., 2007), coaches' communication

(Holt and Hogg, 2002), media pressures (Thelwell et al., 2007), travel (Forrest, 2008), and

being distracted by the crowd (Nicholls, Jones, Polman, and Borkoles, 2009).

It has been suggested that rather than focusing on competition stressors, researchers

should also consider the broader organisational, social, political, and cultural environment in

which individuals are immersed. Woodman and Hardy (2001) explored organisational

stressors encountered by athletes classifying these under four categories, these were

environmental issues; personal issues; leadership issues; and team issues. The main

environmental stressors identified included selection, the training environment and finances.

Nutrition, injury, goals and expectations were identified as common personal stressors.

Coaches and coaching styles were common leadership stressors whilst team stressors

included team atmosphere, support network, roles, and communication. Fletcher and Hanton

(2003, 2005) and Fletcher, Hanton, and Mellalieu, (2006) presented an alternative framework

of organisational stressors. This is comprised of five general dimensions, those being factors

intrinsic to the sport (e.g., training and competition load, travel and accommodation

arrangements); roles in the sport organisation (e.g., role conflict, role ambiguity); sport

relationships and interpersonal demands (e.g., personality type, leadership style); athletic

career and performance development issues (e.g., income and funding, position insecurity)

and organisational structure and climate of the sport (e.g., no sense of belonging, lack of

participation in decision making). Fletcher, Hanton, Mellalieu, and Neil, (2011) interviewed


12 sport performers (six elite and six non-elite) regarding organisational related issues they

had experienced in preparation for competition. Findings supported the five general

dimensions identified by Fletcher and Hanton (2003, 2005). Data indicate that the stressors

were encountered proportionately more by elite performers than non-elite performers with

some demands being in common and some unique to each group.

When considering the two frameworks proposed by Woodman and Hardy (2001) and

Fletcher and colleagues, there are common stressors identified but differences in the way in

which these are classified. For example Woodman and Hardy classified nutrition under

personal stressors whilst Fletcher and Hanton classified the same stressor under factors

intrinsic to the sport. In reviewing the stressor dimensions and the classification of single

stressors, it could be argued that the co-constructions between participants and researchers

required to develop coding frameworks limit their generalisability because the process

incorporates the appraisals of both parties, appraisals not made explicit. Furthermore, the

small sample sizes used necessitate caution when interpreting and looking to generalise the

coding frameworks presented. For example, when Fletcher and Hanton classify nutrition as a

stressor derived from factors intrinsic to sport would this accurately reflect the experiences of

all athletes? Could nutrition be a stressor that also results from body image expectations ever

present within western society, and as such not solely, or not even, factors intrinsic to sport.

Lazarus (1999, 2000a) highlighted a need to understand the unique and contextually

situated demands that unique populations face in order to gain a greater insight into the

coping process. This would support the contention that caution must be exercised when

utilising frameworks purporting to outline common stressors. The two frameworks provided

were both developed using high-performance, adult samples. They were completed within

different sporting organisations, each of which provides its own set of unique and

contextually situated demands. Frameworks that are purported to generalise across sporting

organisations may be relatively ineffectual in establishing those stressors pertinent to an

individual based on their personal and situational circumstances.

Plate 2.1. It is important to establish stressors that accurately reflect the population under investigation.

Copyright Tracey Devonport.

Tracey Devonport 18

Rather, it is important to establish stressors that reflect the unique and contextually

situated demands of the unique population. Support for this contention can be found in

chapter three. Here stressors cited by sports officials indicate that whilst some stressors are

commonly reported across studies (e.g., fear of failure, time pressure and interpersonal

conflict), unique stressors appear salient in different sports, skill levels and cultures.

Whilst the organisational frameworks provided offer an insight into stressors emanating

from the sports domain, they replicate what I perceive to be a limitation of sport coping

research to date. Reviewing sport coping research it is notable that very few researchers

acknowledge stressors beyond the sporting domain (McKenna and Dunstan-Lewis, 2004;

MacNamara and Collins, 2010). As the majority of athletes partaking in sport from entry level

to high-performance sport do so whilst completing their education or maintaining part or full-

time employment I believe this offers an incomplete account of participants stress and coping

experiences. Devonport and Lane (2009a, p. 170) reported the difficulties encountered by

young student-athletes when striving to attain personally meaningful goals in sporting, social,

academic and sometimes work domains. They noted that more than one young athlete

described the efforts required in pursuing multiple goals as a superhuman endeavour,

thereby using terms to indicate the complexity and difficulty of achieving such goals.

Similarly, Sullivan and Nashman (1998) reported that United States Olympic Committee

(USOC) sport psychologists working with Olympic athletes revealed non-performance issues

including life balance, relationship issues, and consequences of failure to be amongst athletes

primary stressors.

I believe that a more holistic approach is warranted when exploring stress and coping in

order to meet the diverse needs of student-athletes (Devonport and Lane, 2009a, 2009b;

MacNamara and Collins, 2010; McKenna and Dunstan-Lewis, 2004). Such an approach

acknowledges that sport considerations (such as selection issues or training demands) and

non-sport considerations (such as relationship issues or exam pressures) all influence an

athletes ability to cope and ultimately influence their ability to train and compete optimally.

Friesen and Orlick (2010) note that improving an athletes capabilities in the sporting context

begins with, and is facilitated by, the growth and improvement of the athlete as a human

being. The development of generic coping skills interventions intended to manage stress

(Smith, 1999) may facilitate the achievement of personal goals across domains and thereby

help promote balance. This may then help attenuate stressors such as those identified by

Devonport and Lane (2009a) and Sullivan and Nashman (1998). It is also proposed that

developing such interventions may aid student-athletes in the transition out of education (e.g.,

into employment) and/or sport (e.g., athletic retirement) by encompassing the broader needs

of student-athletes and helping to facilitate lifelong success (Devonport and Lane, 2009a,

2009b; MacNamara and Collins, 2010). Anderson, Miles, Robinson, and Mahoney (2004) in

an assessment of sport psychology service delivery, revealed that athletes valued consultants

who addressed issues outside of sport (e.g., academic life).

To help explore the concept of stressors, complete, or ask a friend to complete Task Box

2.1. In doing so, identify stressors that you/they encounter as a result of sports participation.

Are these all exclusively derived within the sporting context, as a result of competition, or

stressors that necessitate reactive coping?


Task Box 2.1. Indentifying factors perceived as potential stressors amongst athletes

Using your own experiences, or speaking with a friend or colleague with competitive

experience in sport, use the Table below to identify stressors encountered, corresponding

coping behaviours and consequences.

Potential stressor Coping strategy(ies) and

intended function

Coping outcome

e.g.,

Competition

pressures

Ignore (to help lessen

emotional impact)

Self-talk (to give myself a

clear focus on the

present)

Able to minimise the

emotional impact of

competition and stay

focused my

performance goals

I predict that pursuing sport or exercise whilst concurrently pursuing work, academic and

social goals/commitments elicits stressors within and across domains. Regular sport and

exercise participation may result in stressors that impact on non-sport goals (e.g., promotion

at work, A-grade assignment at school) whilst non-sport stressors may impact upon sport and

exercise goals. For example, financial stressors may impact upon the ability to participate in

sport; personal stressors may impact upon the ability to focus during competition; stressors

encountered in more than one domain may affect an individuals capacity to cope with the

cumulative stressors. In short the stressors identified may not be exclusively derived from

within the sports domain. The tendency to exclusively explore stressors resulting from the

sports environment is a limitation of the sport coping literature, as is the tendency to focus on

reactive coping. How many of the stressors identified in Task Box 2.1 are known in advance?

In which case future oriented coping could, and theorists would argue, should be utilised.

Future oriented coping will be considered later in this chapter.

When looking to identify stressors encountered by athletes an issue that cannot be

overlooked is the methodology utilised. In two reviews of sport coping research it was noted

that studies typically adopt a retrospective and cross-sectional research design (Holt, Hoar,

and Fraser, 2005; Nicholls and Polman, 2007). If we accept that coping is a dynamic process

that fluctuates over time in response to changing demands and appraisals of the situation, then

Tracey Devonport 20

such methodological approaches are not appropriate in capturing the dynamics of coping

(Folkman and Lazarus, 1985; Lazarus, 1991, 1993, 1999). One key reason why such

approaches are flawed is due to the limitations of human memory which are explored in

chapter three. A second key reason was presented by Lazarus (1999) who contends that

individuals should be studied in different contexts and at different times if the intention is to

explore coping as a process. He asserts that the best research design for this kind of research

is longitudinal (p. 114). In seeking to meet these recommendations, recent sport coping

research has endeavoured to utilise prospective, longitudinal research designs to examine

stressors and coping among athletes. Such studies suggest that the stressors encountered by

athletes may vary across phases of the competitive season. For example, Nicholls, Holt,

Polman, and James (2005) reported that fluctuations in the frequency of reported stressors

coincided with the most important period of competitions among adolescent international

golfers during a 31-day period. Similarly Tamminen and Holt (2010) found stressors

encountered by adolescent female basketball players over a competitive season varied as a

result of the teams changing contextual demands. Early-season stressors stemmed from

concerns over team selection, team dynamic issues were salient mid-season stressors whereas

team performance concerns were evidenced during the final part of the season whilst

competing to secure a play off place. Whilst these early findings evidence the benefits of

utilising a longitudinal research design in identifying contextual stressors, they still fail to

effectively capture the essence of stress as a dynamic process. This can be exemplified by

exploring definitions of stress as a dynamic process.

Two definitions of stress as a dynamic process are commonly adopted. Firstly, stress as

an interaction. The interactional definition emphasises the interaction between the person and

the environment wherein a cognitive-emotional reaction is elicited, but the person and the

environment maintain their distinctiveness (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984). Transactional

definitions by contrast acknowledge that encounters between a person and the environment

can, and often do mutually affect one another (Lazarus, 1998). Transactional definitions are

less focused on the specific components of an interaction and are more concerned with the

psychological processes underpinning them (Lazarus, 1991, 1999, 2000a). Lazarus (1998, p.

xix) argued that transaction is much more than interaction... [it] brings the causal variables

together at a higher level of abstraction; namely, the relational meaning constructed by the

individual who is confronted by (or selects) a particular environment. Attention is focussed

on the key issues surrounding, and cognitive processes underpinning an individuals ongoing,

reciprocal, and adaptive relationship with their environment. How the individual copes and

adapts will affect environmental conditions, personal resources and future reactions.

Increasingly coping researchers are utilising the term transaction because this term

acknowledges relational meaning (Fletcher, Hanton, and Mellalieu, 2006). Relational

meaning is the meaning an individual construes from their relationship with the environment,

Lazarus (1999) suggests that relational meaning and transactions provide a language of

relationships fundamental to conceptual developments in coping research. He further explains

that such terms move research on from stimulus and response phraseology which imply that

the two terms are separable.

The key question that can be derived from these definitions is to what extent do the

studies presented capture interactions or transactions? The answer is that at the present time

few studies have truly achieved this. The research conducted by Nicholls et al. (2005) and

Tamminen and Holt (2010) collated qualitative data intended to help explore stressors and


coping. In this regard they did identify stressors and coping strategies commonly encountered

and utilised. However by reducing qualitative data to frequency counts collated across

participants they deconstructed rich narratives that may have offered an insight into coping

processes. In particular these studies failed to explore those cognitive processes that underpin

the appraisal of stressors. It is these cognitive processes that are deemed to be critical in both

definitions offered of stress as a dynamic process. A more comprehensive assessment of

appraisal is important to further understanding of coping processes. For example, what is the

influence of perceived control (secondary appraisal) over the situation/environment as well as

control over emotional responses on the selection and application of coping strategies? The

consequence of failing to explore cognitive processes is that the studies application is limited

and the results are potentially confounded.

The research outlined is not unique in delimiting exploration to particular aspects of

theory, nor is it unusual that sample sizes and study duration is restricted (Gaudreau and

Blondin, 2004; Holt and Dunn, 2004; Lazarus and Lazarus, 2006). It has been suggested that

methodologically, due to the complexity of coping, process models of coping such as the

Transactional Model (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984) or Cognitive-Motivational-Relational

theory (Lazarus, 1991, 1999, 2000c) are difficult to test empirically as a whole model and that

compromise is typically necessitated (Schwarzer and Taubert, 2002). Whilst it can be argued

that studies completed to date using various designs have successfully identified stressors

encountered by participants and some have also partially demonstrated the dynamic nature of

coping (Calmeiro et al., 2010; Holt and Hogg, 2002; Poczwardowski and Conroy, 2002), I

would challenge recommendations for compromise. Lazarus and Lazarus (2006, p. 32) note

what is needed is for researchers to draw on as many different methods of research as are

suitable to the research question being asked. If the intention is to capture stress and coping

processes, then qualitative case studies offer a potentially fruitful line of investigation.

Prominent coping researchers have called for a descriptive exploration of coping (Compas,

1987; Frydenberg, 2002; Lazarus, 1999, 2000a; Folkman, 1992; Lazarus and Lazarus, 2006).

Lazarus suggests that quantitative methods have been used extensively with little progress in

conceptual understanding (Lazarus, 1999, 2000a).

I would encourage practitioners and applied researchers to establish the unique stressors

faced by the population and/or individual they are investigating. They must then ascertain the

extent to which individuals recognise these stressors. Stressors must clearly be recognised as

such before the stress process can proceed. Once a potential stressor is perceived, it is

appraised (primary appraisal) in terms of whether the event/demand is meaningful and/or

important, whether it can be framed in terms of threat or challenge, and w

Managing Stress from Theory to Application

Documents

Transcript of Managing Stress from Theory to Application