In this meta-analytic and narrative review, we examine several overarching issues related to the study of coping, emotion regulation, and internalizing and externalizing symptoms of psychopathology in childhood and adolescence, including the conceptualization and measurement of these constructs. We report a quantitative meta-analysis of 212 studies (N = 80,850 participants) that measured the associations between coping and emotion regulation with symptoms of internalizing and externalizing psychopathology. Within the meta-analysis we address the association of broad domains of coping and emotion regulation (e.g., total coping, emotion regulation), intermediate factors of coping and emotion regulation (e.g., primary control coping, secondary control coping), and specific coping and emotion regulation strategies (e.g., emotional expression, cognitive reappraisal) with internalizing and externalizing symptoms. For cross-sectional studies, which made up the majority of studies included, we examine 3 potential moderators: age, measure quality, and single versus multiple informants. Finally, we separately consider findings from longitudinal studies as these provide stronger tests of the effects. After accounting for publication bias, findings indicate that the broad domain of emotion regulation and adaptive coping and the factors of primary control coping and secondary control coping are related to lower levels of symptoms of psychopathology. Further, the domain of maladaptive coping, the factor of disengagement coping, and the strategies of emotional suppression, avoidance, and denial are related to higher levels of symptoms of psychopathology. Finally, we offer a critique of the current state of the field and outline an agenda for future research. (PsycINFO Database Record

Coping, emotion regulation, and psychopathology in childhood and adolescence: A meta-analysis and narrative review

The well-replicated observation that many people maintain mental health despite exposure to severe psychological or physical adversity has ignited interest in the mechanisms that protect against stress-related mental illness. Focusing on resilience rather than pathophysiology in many ways represents a paradigm shift in clinical-psychological and psychiatric research that has great potential for the development of new prevention and treatment strategies. More recently, research into resilience also arrived in the neurobiological community, posing nontrivial questions about ecological validity and translatability. Drawing on concepts and findings from transdiagnostic psychiatry, emotion research, and behavioral and cognitive neuroscience, we propose a unified theoretical framework for the neuroscientific study of general resilience mechanisms. The framework is applicable to both animal and human research and supports the design and interpretation of translational studies. The theory emphasizes the causal role of stimulus appraisal (evaluation) processes in the generation of emotional responses, including responses to potential stressors. On this basis, it posits that a positive (non-negative) appraisal style is the key mechanism that protects against the detrimental effects of stress and mediates the effects of other known resilience factors. Appraisal style is shaped by three classes of cognitive processes-positive situation classification, reappraisal, and interference inhibition-that can be investigated at the neural level. Prospects for the future development of resilience research are discussed.

https://www.boksem.nl/pdf/Quirin2015brr.pdf

A conceptual framework for the neurobiological study of resilience

Amid the global outbreak of COVID-19, resilience is likely to be one of the many possible outcomes. Studies pertaining to resilience following potentially traumatic events including disease outbreak have shown that the vast majority of individuals are resilient, and that outcomes depend on a combination of resilience factors including exposure severity, individual differences, family context, and community characteristics. To better understand psychological dysfunction and resilience during the global outbreak of COVID-19, researchers are encouraged to investigate long-term patterns of mental health rather than cross-sectional prevalence rates, adopt prospective designs and analyses, integrate multiple risk and resilience factors to enhance outcome prediction, and consider the importance of flexibility as the situation unfolds. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

https://psycnet.apa.org/journals/tra/12/S1/S51.pdf

Psychological adjustment during the global outbreak of COVID-19: A resilience perspective.

Background: High job demands and low job resources may cause job strain and eventually result in burnout. However, previous research has generally ignored the roles of time and self-regulation. Objectives: This theoretical article synthesizes the literature to propose a multilevel model that delineates how acute job strain translates into enduring and severe job burnout. Methods: We integrate self-regulation perspectives in job demands-resources (JD-R) theory to propose that short-term job strain and eventually enduring burnout is the result of consistently high job demands and low job resources - combined with failed self-regulation. Results: The model shows that when employees are confronted with increased job strain, they are more likely to use maladaptive self-regulation strategies, such as coping inflexibility and self-undermining. In addition, when job strain increases, employees are less likely to use adaptive self-regulation strategies, such as job stress recovery and job crafting. It follows that when the job becomes more stressful, stable resources become more important. Organizational resources such as human resource practices and healthy leadership may help employees to regulate their short-term fatigue and avoid enduring burnout. Furthermore, key personal resources like emotional intelligence and proactive personality may help employees to recognize and regulate their fatigue in an effective way. Conclusion: The proposed model of burnout expands JD-R theory and offers important practical implications for the prevention and reduction of burnout.

/pdf/job-demands-resources-theory-and-self-regulation-new-43pi0zahmd.pdf

Job Demands-Resources theory and self-regulation: new explanations and remedies for job burnout.

Background Identifying salient and widespread health-promoting targets is a prerequisite for efficient public health initiatives. We tested the moderating influence of psychological flexibility — a fundamental, trainable set of intrapersonal and interpersonal processes that help people manage stressors and strengthen alternative adaptive behaviors — on the relationship between known risk factors and physical health, mental health, and well-being. Method A representative sample of 1035 participants in Switzerland aged 18 – 74 years answered questions about their physical health, health care utilization, mental health, well-being, and three risk factors: stressful life events, daily stress, and low social support. Statistical models tested whether psychological flexibility moderated the relationship between risk factors and outcomes. Results Psychological flexibility consistently moderated the relationship between stress and all tested outcomes, following a dose response: Higher levels were more protective. Conclusions Targeting psychological flexibility — a salient and widespread set of trainable skills — could promote various health outcomes.

Psychological flexibility as a malleable public health target: Evidence from a representative sample

Compared with the large body of literature on coping, coping flexibility has received relatively scant research attention, although more such studies have begun to emerge recently. Researchers have conceptualized coping flexibility in diverse ways: as a broad coping repertoire, a well-balanced coping profile, cross-situational variability in strategy deployment, a good strategy-situation fit, or the perceived ability to cope with environmental changes. This meta-analysis is the first to provide a summary estimate of the overall effect size and investigate cross-study sources of variation in the beneficial role of coping flexibility. The analysis covers all available studies conducted between 1978 and 2013 that empirically tested the relationship between coping flexibility and psychological adjustment. The results of a random-effects model revealed a small to moderate overall mean effect size (r = .23, 95% CI [.19, .28], 80% CRI [-.02, .49], k = 329, N = 58,946). More important, the magnitude of the positive link between coping flexibility and psychological adjustment varied with the conceptualization of such flexibility. Studies adopting the perceived ability or strategy-situation fit conceptualization yielded moderate effect sizes, whereas those adopting the broad repertoire, balanced profile, or cross-situational variability conceptualization yielded small effect sizes. In addition, the positive link between coping flexibility and psychological adjustment was stronger in samples from countries lower (vs. higher) in individualism and samples with higher (vs. lower) average ages. Individualism and age explained 10% and 13% of the variance, respectively. We discuss the conceptual problems and implications and propose a synthesized conceptualization of coping flexibility.

/pdf/coping-flexibility-and-psychological-adjustment-to-stressful-11einas38g.pdf

Hi-Po Bobo Lau

Papers

Coping flexibility and psychological adjustment to stressful life changes: A meta-analytic review.