Stress and coping by Stress and coping by adolescents in adolescents in

the Youth Connectedness the Youth Connectedness ProjectProject

Paul Jose, Senior Researcher

Roy McKenzie Centre for the Study of Families - October 2007

Why study this topic?Why study this topic?

• The study of stress, coping, and adjustment in adolescents is important because adolescence is a period of transitions and changes, both psychologically and physically.

• Considerable research devoted to this topic:• “sturm und drang”?• Identity (Erikson)• Risk factors that predict later adjustment (risk and

resilience)• Stress and coping (Lazarus and Folkman)

What can we learn?

• I like to study stress, coping, and adjustment all together. In other words, they are three elements in a dynamic process and we should study them together.

• How should we conceptualise this dynamic?

The mediational approach

Stressful eventsPsychological

adjustment

Coping• Social support• Problem-solving• Rumination• Externalising• Avoidance• Resilience

The moderational approach

Stressful eventsPsychological

adjustment

Coping• Social support• Problem-solving• Rumination• Externalising• Avoidance• Resilience

The variables• Stress: “Thinking back over the last 12

months, how many problems have you had in each of the following areas of your life?...School, Family, Friends, Body.” (5 pts)

• Coping:– Resilience: :My belief in myself gets me

through hard times”– Social support: “I talk to others about

how I am feeling”– Problem-solving: “I try to change the

situation to solve the problem”

More variables• Coping:

– Externalising: “I get into fights or argue with people”

– Avoidance: “I avoid dealing with my problems”– Rumination: “I think "why can't I handle things

better?“

• Negative Affect: “I could not stop feeling bad, even when others tried to cheer me up”

• Life Aspirations: “I often think about my future (what I want to do with my life)”

• Life Satisfaction: “I am happy with my life”

Descriptive statistics

Variable Range Mean Point on scale

Stress 1-5 2.33 “a few” to “some”

Resilience 1-5 3.56 “neutral” to “agree”

Social support 1-5 3.11 “neutral” to “agree”

Problem-solving 1-5 3.28 “neutral” to “agree”

Avoidance 1-5 2.47 “disagree” to “neutral”

Externalising 1-5 2.07 “disagree” to “neutral”

Rumination 1-5 2.42 “disagree” to “neutral”

Negative affect 1-4 1.93 1-2 days out of 7

Life aspirations 1-5 4.13 “agree” to “agree strongly”

Life satisfaction 1-5 4.06 “agree” to “agree strongly”

Moderation• Since we don’t have longitudinal data (yet), I

choose to examine moderational relationships at this time.

• Moderation tells us under what conditions the basic relationship may exist.

• Basic relationships:– Stress to Negative Affect– Stress to Life Aspirations– Stress to Life Satisfaction

• I expected that stress would be negatively related to the positive outcomes and positively related to the negative outcome.

Basic relationships:Stress predicting 3 DVs

Dependent variable

Beta Signif. R2

Negative affect

.30 .001 .09

Life aspirations

-.14 .001 .03

Life satisfaction

-.26 .001 .07

Coping predicting Neg Affect

Moderator variable

Beta Signif. R2

Rumination .20 .001 .03

Externalis-ing

.19 .001 .03

Avoidance .11 .001 .02

All are maladaptive coping strategies.

Coping predicting Life Aspirations

Moderator variable

Beta Significance R2

Resilience .37 .001 .13

Social support .27 .001 .07

Problem-solving .36 .001 .12

Avoidance -.10 .001 .01

Externalising -.12 .001 .01

Rumination .08 .001 .01

Note that rumination is a positive predictor.

Coping predicting Life Satisfaction

Moderator variable

Beta Significance R2

Resilience .35 .001 .12

Social support .28 .001 .08

Problem-solving .35 .001 .12

Avoidance -.11 .001 .01

Externalising -.14 .001 .02

Rumination -.08 .001 .01

Rumination is a negative predictor in this case.

• Adaptive coping strategies generally positively predicted positive outcomes

• Maladaptive coping strategies generally negatively predicted positive outcomes

• Adaptive coping strategies predicted considerable variance in Life Aspirations and Life Satisfaction; maladaptive strategies did not.

• Adaptive coping strategies did NOT predict any variance in Negative Affect.

• Rumination has a paradoxical influence: positive for Life Aspirations, negative for Life Satisfaction, and positive for Negative Affect.

What have we learned?

• Okay, how do these coping strategies affect the basic relationships between stress and the three DVs? Under what conditions do these main effects occur?

• Eight significant moderation results were obtained across these 18 regressions.

• I won’t present all of them, but here are several of the most interesting ones.

Moderation by coping

strategies

Stress to Negative Affect

moderated by Resilience

1.20

1.30

1.40

1.50

1.60

1.70

1.80

1.90

2.00

low med high

Stress

Resilience

high

med

low

Low resilience under conditions of high stress is associated with higher negativeaffect. Resilience buffers against stress, particularly under high stress.

Stress to Life Aspirations

moderated by Avoidance

3.90

4.00

4.10

4.20

4.30

4.40

4.50

low med high

Stress

Avoidance

high

med

low

Avoidance doesn’t make any difference under high stress (all low), but underlow stress someone who avoids problems reports lower aspirations. Highestaspirations: low stress/low avoidance.

Stress to Life Aspirations

moderated by Rumination

3.90

4.00

4.10

4.20

4.30

low med high

Stress

Rumination

high

med

low

Remember that rumination positively predicted life aspirations. This graph showsthat high rumination has a buffering effect, particularly under conditions of highstress.

Stress to Life Satisfaction

moderated by Social

Support

3.30

3.50

3.70

3.90

4.10

4.30

4.50

low med high

Stress

Social Support

high

med

low

Social support has the greatest buffering effect under conditions of high stress.

Stress to Life Satisfaction

moderated by Rumination

Rumination negatively predicts life satisfaction. Rumination makes no differenceunder the condition of high stress, but under low stress a high ruminator reportslower life satisfaction than a low ruminator.

3.80

3.90

4.00

4.10

4.20

4.30

4.40

low med high

Stress

Rumination

high

med

low

• I (and others) have seen that stress and other negative experiences increase from pre-adolescent through late adolescent years: the so-called “storm and stress” years.

• Further, I expected to find gender differences for some of these variables as well. Girls tend to show worse adjustment starting about age 12-13 years.

Let’s change gears: Did these variableschange over this age range and/ordiffer by gender?

Stress depicted by gender and age

Males are pretty steady, but females increased in their reports of stress. Femalesgreater than males starting at age 12 years.

Negative Affect depicted by gender andage

Males decrease in negative affect, but females stay pretty stable.

It’s concerning that everyone decreases in life aspirations over time, femalesespecially so.

Life aspirations depicted by gender and age

No gender difference, but there is a marked decrease with age.

Life satisfaction depicted by gender and age

Rumination depicted by gender and age

Marked decrease by males and a slight increase by females.

• Girls show an inclination to report higher negative outcomes (stress, negaff) after about age 12 years.– Puberty and hormones?– Changing social roles?– More demands?

• I’m interested in whether connectedness buffers the impact of these forces—analyses yet to be done.

• In particular, are stressors in the four domains (school, family, friends, body) buffered by connectedness in relevant four domains (school, family, friends, community)?

What do these results indicate?

Girls’ ratings of problems with body

Boys go down with age whereas girls show a steady increase over age. The patternin the family area is similar so it’s not all about puberty, it seems.

• I’ve only had enough time here to tantalise you with some interesting and intriguing findings.

• Sorry that there’s no clear policy implications coming out of this (yet).

• Are there particular analyses that you’d be interested in?

Much more to do