Cited by 1,431Attachment and Relationship DynamicsHealth disparities and outcomesHealth and Well-being Studies

Perceived support, received support, and adjustment to stressful life events

Wethington, Elaine, Kessler, Ronald C.·1986·Journal of Health and Social Behavior

Abstract

A systematic review of the literature on social support shows that a stress-buffering effect is most consistently found when support is measured as a perception that one's network is ready to provide aid and assistance if needed (Kessler and McLeod, 1985). Two interpretations of this association are considered here: (I) that the perception of support availability indirectly indicates actual network responses to stressful events that more directly promote healthy adjustment; and (2) that the perception of support availability influences adjustment directly by modifying appraisals of the situation. No attempt has been made in the literature to discriminate between these two interpretations. One reason is that a strategy for critically evaluating the competing hypotheses has not yet been developed. A main contribution of our paper is that it exposits such a strategy. A rigorous evaluation of the competing interpretations requires a prospective research design and a data collection effort explicitly aimed at obtaining information about both actual support transactions and perceptions of support availability in hypothetical situations. We know of no data set that meets these dual requirements. As an illustration of the strategy suggested here, however, we analyze cross-sectional data from a large-scale national survey. Although limited, these data provide provisional information about the competing interpretations. Analysis shows that perceived support is, in general, more important than received support in predicting adjustment to stressful life events. We also present evidence that the influence of received support may be mediated by perceived support. These results demonstrate the power of the strategy and argue for a direct evaluation with more appropriate data.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/2136504

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wethington, E., & Kessler, R. C.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Venue
Journal of Health and Social Behavior
Published
1986-03
Volume
27
Issue
1
Pages
78
ISSN
0022-1465 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1964417192
Cited by
1,431
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 46 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 72 · 2019: 49 · 2018: 37 · 2017: 68 · 2016: 44 · 2015: 40 · 2014: 44 · 2013: 56 · 2012: 57
FWCI
27.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Health and Social Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (1P01AG03981)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (1R01MH37706, 1 K01 MH00507)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Health and Well-being Studies
Keywords
perceived social support, received social support, life events, stress buffering, psychological adjustment, social support networks
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Aged, Female, Humans, Life Change Events, Male, Middle Aged, Social Environment, Social Perception, Social Support

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