From analyzing 100 assessments of coping, the authors critiqued strategies and identified best practices for constructing category systems. From current systems, a list of 400 ways of coping was compiled. For constructing lower order categories, the authors concluded that confirmatory factor analysis should replace the 2 most common strategies (exploratory factor analysis and rational sorting). For higher order categories, they recommend that the 3 most common distinctions (problem- vs. emotion-focused, approach vs. avoidance, and cognitive vs. behavioral) no longer be used. Instead, the authors recommend hierarchical systems of action types (e.g., proximity seeking, accommodation). From analysis of 6 such systems, 13 potential core families of coping were identified. Future steps involve deciding how to organize these families, using their functional homogeneity and distinctiveness, and especially their links to adaptive processes.

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/bul/129/2/216.pdf

Searching for the structure of coping: a review and critique of category systems for classifying ways of coping.

Although theoretical and empirical work on topics related to meaning and meaning making proliferate, careful evaluation and integration of this area have not been carried out. Toward this end, this...

Meaning in the context of stress and coping

Study objective: The aim of this paper is to systematically review and analyse the validity and reliability of Antonovsky’s life orientation questionnaire/sense of coherence scale (SOC). Design: The study is descriptive and analytical with a systematic integration of the contemporary knowledge base on the salutogenic research published 1992–2003. The review includes 458 scientific publications and 13 doctoral theses. Setting: Worldwide, based on postgraduate scientific publications in eight authorised databases, doctoral theses, and available books. Main results: The SOC questionnaire has been used in at least 33 languages in 32 countries with at least 15 different versions of the questionnaire. In 124 studies using SOC-29 the Cronbach’s α ranges from 0.70 to 0.95. The α values in 127 studies using SOC-13 range from 0.70 to 0.92, and in 60 studies using a modified SOC scale range from 0.35 to 0.91. Test-retest correlation show stability and range from 0.69 to 0.78 (1 year), 0.64 (3 years), 0.42 to 0.45 (4 years), 0.59 to 0.67 (5 years) to 0.54 (10 years). The means of SOC-29 range 100.50 (SD 28.50) to 164.50 (SD 17.10) points and SOC-13 from 35.39 (SD 0.10) to 77.60 (SD 13.80) points. After 10 years SOC seems to be comparatively stable, but not as stable as Antonovsky initially assumed. SOC tends to increase with age. The factorial structure of SOC seems rather to be multidimensional than unidimensional. SOC predicts a positive outcome in a long term perspective, although there are divergent findings reported. The SOC scale seems to be a reliable, valid, and cross culturally applicable instrument measuring how people manage stressful situations and stay well.

https://jech.bmj.com/content/jech/59/6/460.full.pdf

Validity of Antonovsky’s sense of coherence scale: a systematic review

The authors investigate the structure of intergenerational cohesion by examining social‐psychological, structural, and transactional aspects of adult child‐parent relations. The authors use latent class analysis to develop a typology based on three underlying dimensions of intergenerational solidarity: affinity, opportunity structure, and function. The same five types are found for relations with both mothers and fathers: tight‐knit, sociable, intimate but distant, obligatory, and detached. Relationship types are also differentiated by sociodemographic characteristics; relations with fathers and divorced parents tended to have the weakest cohesion. The authors conclude that adult intergenerational relationships in American families are structurally diverse but generally possess the potential to serve their members' needs.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/231213

Intergenerational solidarity and the structure of adult child-parent relationships in American families

Objective To critically review, analyze, and synthesize the literature on parenting stress among caregivers of children with asthma, cancer, cystic fibrosis, diabetes, epilepsy, juvenile rheumatoid arthritis, and/or sickle cell disease. Method PsychInfo, MEDLINE, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature were searched according to inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of 13 studies and qualitative analysis of 96 studies was conducted. Results Caregivers of children with chronic illness reported significantly greater general parenting stress than caregivers of healthy children (d ¼ .40; p ¼� .0001). Qualitative analysis revealed that greater general parenting stress was associated with greater parental responsibility for treatment management and was unrelated to illness duration and severity across illness populations. Greater parenting stress was associated with poorer psychological adjustment in caregivers and children with chronic illness. Conclusion Parenting stress is an important target for future intervention. General and illness-specific measures of parenting stress should be used in future studies.

Parenting Stress among Caregivers of Children with Chronic Illness: A Systematic Review

Using the Typology Model of Adjustment and Adaptation, a family stress model, the differences in family stressors, resources, family types, parental coping patterns, and child health indices were examined in 27 single-parent families and 27 two-parent families who had a child with cerebral palsy. The two groups of families were matched on the severity of the child's handicap and the age and gender of the parent. There was no significant difference between the two groups of families on the accumulation of stressors and demands, resource strains, family types, family cohesion, family resources of esteem/communication, mastery/health, extended family social support, and the child health indices of overall physical health status and health improvement. Single-parent families were significantly lower on financial well-being and the mother's coping related to maintaining family integration, cooperation, and optimism about the situation. Single-parent families also were higher on family adaptability than two-parent families, reflecting an ability to be more flexible in family rules, power structure, and role relationships.

Family stress and family strengths: a comparison of single- and two-parent families with handicapped children.

Parenthood transition for parents of an infant diagnosed with a congenital heart condition

Head injury affects not only the individual who sustains the injury, but the entire family system (Williams & Kay, 1991). In fact, Brooks (1991) has suggested the impact of head injury is at least as great for families, and often family members are more distressed than the injured person. Family difficulties following head injury frequently include increased burden, psychological distress, and social isolation associated with negative changes in their family member's cognitive functioning, personality, and behavior (Florian, Katz, & Lahav, 1989). A growing body of literature provides firm evidence that head injury hurts families socially, emotionally, and financially. A study by Kozloff (1987) marked an important step in understanding the social impact of head injury on the family. She found that as time went by the size of the injured person's social network decreased and its density increased. As a result, the number of multiplex relationships increased (i.e., family members served more and more functions as nonrelatives dropped out of the picture). The ultimate consequence of these changes was the social isolation of families. Jacobs (1988) reported families who participated in the Los Angeles Head Injury Survey had a recurring worry of chronic financial strain due to costs associated with the injury and loss of income if a family member gave up work to supervise the injured person. Further, McMordie and Barker (1988) surveyed 150 families of persons with head injuries to identify the full costs of medical care, legal fees, and other expenses. They concluded that financial costs to the family are staggering with costs for doctors' bills ranging from $100 to $1,000,000, medications ranging from $100 to $120,000, and legal expenses from $100 to $750,000. The financial trauma of head injury on the family is evident. A series of studies by researchers at the University of Glasgow perhaps best describe the emotional impact of head injury on family members. Thirty-eight of 55 families participating in a study by McKinlay, Brooks, and Bond (1981) reported medium to high levels of stress at 3 months after injury. In a later study, Livingston, Brooks, and Bond (1985) followed families at 3, 6, and 12 months and found increased levels of anxiety and burden at both 6 months and one year post-injury. A 5-year follow-up of the families in the former study found a significant increase (24% to 56%) in families reporting high levels of burden (Brooks, Campsie, Symington, Beattie, & McKinlay, 1986). Further, in a 7-year follow-up of these same families, the percentage of families in the high burden group remained high at 47 percent. Findings also included increasing incidence of marital dysfunction and global psychological adjustment problems in family members (Brooks, Campsie, Symington, Beattie, & McKinlay, 1987). Thus, the overall pattern in the Glasgow studies has been deterioration in relatives' psychological functioning up to 7 years after injury. In most of the services that deal with the head injury population, the perception of the family is that of a resource for helping in the rehabilitation of the person with the head injury. However, the conclusions of the research literature on the coping of families indicate that the family members themselves are a high risk group for emotional and social difficulties. Family members require help in their own right and not only as a by-product of the rehabilitation process with the member with the head injury (Florian, Katz, & Lahav, 1989). Further, while earlier rehabilitation literature emphasized the family as a potential resource in the provision of rehabilitation services (Cook & Ferritor, 1985), writers have more recently emphasized the need for rehabilitation professionals to attend to family needs. Dew, Phillips, and Reiss (1989) stressed the importance of family involvement in the rehabilitation process in order to achieve more successful outcomes and recommended a family systems approach for understanding family identity and problem-solving style. …

A Theoretical Framework for Family Adaptation to Head Injury

Family stress, resources, parental coping, and family types were measured in 58 two-parent families who had a child with myelomeningocele. The sample was divided into three groups based on whether the child had a mild, moderate, or severe level of impairment; and the relationships between the family characteristics and the child's health status and number of active health problems were determined. Results show an increasing level of family system involvement contributing to the child health outcomes with increasing severity of impairment. Implications for assessment and intervention by family practitioners are discussed.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/584321.pdf

Marilyn A. McCubbin

Papers

Family stress and family strengths: a comparison of single- and two-parent families with handicapped children.

Parenthood transition for parents of an infant diagnosed with a congenital heart condition

A Theoretical Framework for Family Adaptation to Head Injury

Family Stress, Resources, and Family Types: Chronic Illness in Children.

Resiliency in Families: The Role of Family Schema and Appraisal in Family Adaptation to Crises