Cargando…

Individual Differences in Adolescent Coping: Comparing a Community Sample and a Low-SES Sample to Understand Coping in Context

Coping that is adaptive in low-stress environments can be ineffective or detrimental in the context of poverty. Identifying coping profiles among adolescents facing varying levels of stress can increase understanding of when and for whom coping may be most adaptive. The present study applied latent...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Perzow, Sarah E. D., Bray, Bethany C., Wadsworth, Martha E., Young, Jami F., Hankin, Benjamin L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8074358/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33495968
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10964-021-01398-z
_version_ 1783684336954900480
author Perzow, Sarah E. D.
Bray, Bethany C.
Wadsworth, Martha E.
Young, Jami F.
Hankin, Benjamin L.
author_facet Perzow, Sarah E. D.
Bray, Bethany C.
Wadsworth, Martha E.
Young, Jami F.
Hankin, Benjamin L.
author_sort Perzow, Sarah E. D.
collection PubMed
description Coping that is adaptive in low-stress environments can be ineffective or detrimental in the context of poverty. Identifying coping profiles among adolescents facing varying levels of stress can increase understanding of when and for whom coping may be most adaptive. The present study applied latent profile analysis (LPA) to identify coping profiles in two distinct samples of adolescents: a community sample of youth aged 11–16 years (N = 374, M(age) = 13.14, 53% girls), and a low-SES sample of youth aged 12–18 years (N = 304, M(age) = 14.56, 55% girls). The ten coping subscales of the Responses to Stress Questionnaire were included as indicators in the LPAs (problem solving, emotion regulation, emotion expression, acceptance, positive thinking, cognitive restructuring, distraction, denial, wishful thinking, and avoidance). Five profiles were identified in the community sample: Inactive, Low Engagement, Cognitive, Engaged, and Active Copers. All but the Low Engagement Copers profile were also identified in the low-SES sample, suggesting that adolescents employ similar coping strategies across contexts, but fewer low-SES adolescents engage in lower levels of coping. Profiles differed by gender and symptoms of internalizing psychopathology. Inactive copers in both samples were more likely to be male. Engaged Copers reported the lowest symptom levels whereas Active Copers reported higher symptoms. Cognitive Copers reported higher levels of anxious and depressive symptoms in the low-SES sample only, suggesting that this pattern of coping may be protective only in less stressful contexts. Elucidating within-person coping patterns is a promising avenue for targeting interventions to those most likely to benefit.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8074358
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80743582021-04-26 Individual Differences in Adolescent Coping: Comparing a Community Sample and a Low-SES Sample to Understand Coping in Context Perzow, Sarah E. D. Bray, Bethany C. Wadsworth, Martha E. Young, Jami F. Hankin, Benjamin L. J Youth Adolesc Article Coping that is adaptive in low-stress environments can be ineffective or detrimental in the context of poverty. Identifying coping profiles among adolescents facing varying levels of stress can increase understanding of when and for whom coping may be most adaptive. The present study applied latent profile analysis (LPA) to identify coping profiles in two distinct samples of adolescents: a community sample of youth aged 11–16 years (N = 374, M(age) = 13.14, 53% girls), and a low-SES sample of youth aged 12–18 years (N = 304, M(age) = 14.56, 55% girls). The ten coping subscales of the Responses to Stress Questionnaire were included as indicators in the LPAs (problem solving, emotion regulation, emotion expression, acceptance, positive thinking, cognitive restructuring, distraction, denial, wishful thinking, and avoidance). Five profiles were identified in the community sample: Inactive, Low Engagement, Cognitive, Engaged, and Active Copers. All but the Low Engagement Copers profile were also identified in the low-SES sample, suggesting that adolescents employ similar coping strategies across contexts, but fewer low-SES adolescents engage in lower levels of coping. Profiles differed by gender and symptoms of internalizing psychopathology. Inactive copers in both samples were more likely to be male. Engaged Copers reported the lowest symptom levels whereas Active Copers reported higher symptoms. Cognitive Copers reported higher levels of anxious and depressive symptoms in the low-SES sample only, suggesting that this pattern of coping may be protective only in less stressful contexts. Elucidating within-person coping patterns is a promising avenue for targeting interventions to those most likely to benefit. 2021-01-25 2021-04 /pmc/articles/PMC8074358/ /pubmed/33495968 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10964-021-01398-z Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Perzow, Sarah E. D.
Bray, Bethany C.
Wadsworth, Martha E.
Young, Jami F.
Hankin, Benjamin L.
Individual Differences in Adolescent Coping: Comparing a Community Sample and a Low-SES Sample to Understand Coping in Context
title Individual Differences in Adolescent Coping: Comparing a Community Sample and a Low-SES Sample to Understand Coping in Context
title_full Individual Differences in Adolescent Coping: Comparing a Community Sample and a Low-SES Sample to Understand Coping in Context
title_fullStr Individual Differences in Adolescent Coping: Comparing a Community Sample and a Low-SES Sample to Understand Coping in Context
title_full_unstemmed Individual Differences in Adolescent Coping: Comparing a Community Sample and a Low-SES Sample to Understand Coping in Context
title_short Individual Differences in Adolescent Coping: Comparing a Community Sample and a Low-SES Sample to Understand Coping in Context
title_sort individual differences in adolescent coping: comparing a community sample and a low-ses sample to understand coping in context
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8074358/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33495968
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10964-021-01398-z
work_keys_str_mv AT perzowsarahed individualdifferencesinadolescentcopingcomparingacommunitysampleandalowsessampletounderstandcopingincontext
AT braybethanyc individualdifferencesinadolescentcopingcomparingacommunitysampleandalowsessampletounderstandcopingincontext
AT wadsworthmarthae individualdifferencesinadolescentcopingcomparingacommunitysampleandalowsessampletounderstandcopingincontext
AT youngjamif individualdifferencesinadolescentcopingcomparingacommunitysampleandalowsessampletounderstandcopingincontext
AT hankinbenjaminl individualdifferencesinadolescentcopingcomparingacommunitysampleandalowsessampletounderstandcopingincontext