Coping profiles, perceived stress and health-related behaviors: A cluster analysis approach
Open accessAbstract
Using cluster analytical procedure, this study aimed (i) to determine whether people could be differentiated on the basis of coping profiles (or unique combinations of coping strategies); and (ii) to examine the relationships between these profiles and perceived stress and health-related behaviors. A sample of 578 French students (345 females, 233 males; M(age)= 21.78, SD(age)= 2.21) completed the Perceived Stress Scale-14 ( Bruchon-Schweitzer, 2002), the Brief COPE ( Muller and Spitz, 2003) and a series of items measuring health-related behaviors. A two-phased cluster analytic procedure (i.e. hierarchical and non-hierarchical-k-means) was employed to derive clusters of coping strategy profiles. The results yielded four distinctive coping profiles: High Copers, Adaptive Copers, Avoidant Copers and Low Copers. The results showed that clusters differed significantly in perceived stress and health-related behaviors. High Copers and Avoidant Copers displayed higher levels of perceived stress and engaged more in unhealthy behavior, compared with Adaptive Copers and Low Copers who reported lower levels of stress and engaged more in healthy behaviors. These findings suggested that individuals' relative reliance on some strategies and de-emphasis on others may be a more advantageous way of understanding the manner in which individuals cope with stress. Therefore, cluster analysis approach may provide an advantage over more traditional statistical techniques by identifying distinct coping profiles that might best benefit from interventions. Future research should consider coping profiles to provide a deeper understanding of the relationships between coping strategies and health outcomes and to identify risk groups.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Denial and behavioral disengagement are the two most central strategies of avoidant coping.
“the two most central strategies of avoidant coping (Aldridge & Roesch, 2008; Doron et al., 2014)”
From Coping profiles and their association with psychological functioning: A latent profile analysis of coping strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic (2022) · cites this paper as Doron et al., 2014
The Definition of Coping section lists denial and behavioral disengagement as avoidant coping strategies. It also lists self-blame and substance use, without identifying denial and behavioral disengagement as the two most central strategies. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe engaged profile corresponds to previously labelled engaged, adaptive, assimilative, or active copers.
“The most extensive profile in our study, the engaged coping profile, corresponds to this combination.”
From Coping profiles and their association with psychological functioning: A latent profile analysis of coping strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic (2022) · cites this paper as Doron et al., 2014
The ‘Profiles of Coping and Health Outcomes’ section describes an ‘Adaptive Copers’ group and a group with high levels of active coping strategies. The Discussion also characterizes Adaptive Copers by their combination of strategies. The copy does not identify an ‘engaged’ profile or establish that it corresponds to profiles labelled ‘engaged’ or ‘assimilative’; page numbers were not available in the indexed passages. (LLM, conf=0.78)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe three coping profiles identified resemble profiles found in earlier studies conducted in specific samples and stressful situations.
“similar to those found in previous studies in specific samples and stressful circumstances”
From Coping profiles and their association with psychological functioning: A latent profile analysis of coping strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic (2022) · cites this paper as Doron et al., 2014
The Discussion and “Students’ coping profiles and health-related behaviors” sections say the study’s profiles are consistent with earlier cluster-analytic research. But the Discussion names four profiles in the present study—Low, Adaptive, High, and Avoidant Copers—not three. The “Profiles of coping and health outcomes” section describes three profiles in an earlier study. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe avoidant profile identified resembles the previously described avoidant profile.
“The avoidant coping profile identified in our study resembles this profile.”
From Coping profiles and their association with psychological functioning: A latent profile analysis of coping strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic (2022) · cites this paper as Doron et al., 2014
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 58 · Cited by 140
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- Cohen, S., Gottlieb, B. H. and Underwood, L. G. (2000) Social Support Measurements and Interventions: A Guide for Health and Social Scientists. Oxford University Press, New York.
- Doron, J., Trouillet, R., Gana, K., Boiche ´, J., Neveu, D. and Ninot, G. (2014) Examination of the hierarchical struc- ture of the Brief COPE: empirical and theoretical conver- gences. Journal of Personality Assessment.
- Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. and Black, W. C. (1998) Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Sadlle River.
- Nicholls, A. R (ed.), Coping in Sport: Concepts, Theories, and Related Constructs. New York, Nova, pp. 15-32.
- Nunnally, J. C. (1994) Psychometric Theory, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York.
- Authors
- Doron, J., Trouillet, R., Maneveau, A., Neveu, D., & Ninot, G.
- Affiliations
- Université Paris-Est Créteil (FR)
- Université de Montpellier (FR)
- Inserm (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Doron, J.
- Venue
- Health Promotion International
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2014-10-16
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 88-100
- ISSN
- 0957-4824 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2245
- OpenAlex
- W2331051322
- Cited by
- 140
- References
- 58
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2
- FWCI
- 7.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Health Promotion International (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- Université de Montpellier
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Student Stress and Coping
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
- Keywords
- coping profiles, coping strategies, perceived stress, health behavior, university students, Brief COPE, avoidance coping, adaptive coping, harmful habits
- MeSH terms
- Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Alcohol Drinking, Analysis of Variance, Marijuana Abuse, Coffee, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, France, Humans, Male, Motor Activity, Smoking, Stress, Psychological, Students, Universities, Health Behavior, Cluster Analysis, Young Adult
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
