Cited by 561Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentStudent Stress and Coping

Cognitive coping strategies and symptoms of depression and anxiety: A comparison between adolescents and adults

Open access
GARNEFSKI, NADIA, LEGERSTEE, JEROEN, KRAAIJ, VIVIAN, VAN DEN KOMMER, TESSA, TEERDS, JAN·2002·Journal of Adolescence

Abstract

The present study focused on comparability of adolescents and adults in the reporting of cognitive coping strategies and their relationship to symptoms of depression and anxiety. Two samples were included: 487 adolescents attending a secondary school and 630 adults from a general practitioners practice. Data were obtained on symptoms of depression and anxiety and the use of nine cognitive coping strategies: acceptance, catastrophizing, other-blame, positive reappraisal, putting into perspective, refocus on planning, positive refocusing, rumination and self-blame. The results showed that all cognitive coping strategies were reported by adolescents to a significantly lesser extent than by adults. Further, it was shown that both in adolescents and adults a considerable percentage of the variance in symptomatology was explained by the use of cognitive coping strategies. Although adolescents and adults differed in relative strength of the relationships, generally speaking, conclusions were the same: in both groups, the cognitive coping strategies self-blame, rumination, catastrophizing and positive reappraisal were shown to play the most important role in the reporting of symptoms of psychopathology, showing the importance of introducing prevention and intervention programmes at an early stage.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/jado.2002.0507

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A study on a non-clinical adolescent sample identified a specific cognitive model for depression in adolescents, different from the one for anxiety; high Rumination and Self-Blame (only in females), and low Positive Refocusing and Positive Reappraisal (in both males and females), were significantly associated with depression.

    “Regarding the relationship between different coping strategies and depression in adolescents, a study carried out on a non-clinical adolescent sample identified a specific cognitive model for depression in adolescents, which was also different from the one for anxiety [15]. High Rumination and Self-Blame (only in females), and low Positive Refocusing and Positive Reappraisal (in both males and”
  • Maladaptive strategies such as Catastrophising, Rumination, and Suppression have been correlated with mental health disorders including depression, anxiety disorders, PTSD, and eating disorders.

    “In general, the use of maladaptive strategies, such as, but not limited to, Catastrophising, Rumination, and Suppression, has been correlated with mental health disorders, such as depression [9,12,13], anxiety disorders [14,15], PTSD [16,17], eating disorders [18,19], etc.”
  • The cognitive style associated with depression does not undergo significant changes in adults.

    “By linking the fact that there is no specificity related to severity with the fact that there is no age-specificity (the cognitive style associated with depression does not undergo significant changes in adults), implications for prevention can result as well [15].”
  • Adults are better equipped than younger counterparts due to experiences in learning and practicing emotion regulation strategies.

    “Adults are better equipped than their younger counterparts due to their experiences in learning and practicing emotion regulation strategies (Garnefski, Legerstee, Kraaij, Van Den Kommer, & Teerds, 2002).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
GARNEFSKI, N., LEGERSTEE, J., KRAAIJ, V., VAN DEN KOMMER, T., & TEERDS, J.
Affiliations
Leiden University (NL)
Venue
Journal of Adolescence
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2002-12
Volume
25
Issue
6
Pages
603-611
ISSN
0140-1971 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2106870230
Cited by
561
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 39 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 22
FWCI
5.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Adolescence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Student Stress and Coping
Keywords
cognitive coping, depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, adolescents, adults, age differences, rumination, self-blame, catastrophizing, positive reappraisal, acceptance, psychopathology, early intervention
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Anxiety, Child, Cognition, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review