Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 6,328

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An Analysis of Coping in a Middle-Aged Community Sample

Folkman, Susan, Lazarus, Richard S.·1980·Journal of Health and Social Behavior
DOI 10.2307/2136617
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study analyzes the ways 100 community-residing men and women aged 45 to 64 coped with the stressful events of daily living during one year. Lazarus's cognitive-phenomenological analysis of psychological stress provides the theoreticalframework. Information about recently experienced stressful encounters was elicited through monthly interviews and self-report questionnaires completed between interviews. At the end of each interview and questionnaire, the participant indicated on a 68-item Ways of Coping checklist those coping thoughts and actions used in the specific encounter. A mean of 13.3 episodes was reported by each participant. Two functions of coping, problem-focused and emotion-focused, are analyzed with separate measures. Both problemand emotion-focused coping were used in 98% of the 1,332 episodes, emphasizing that coping conceptualized in either defensive or problem-solving terms is incomplete-both functions are usually involved. Intraindividual analyses show that people are more variable than consistent in their coping patterns. The context of an event, who is involved, how it is appraised, age, and gender are examined as potential influences on coping. Context and how the event is appraised are the most potent factors. Work contexts favor problem-focused coping, and health contexts favor emotionfocused coping. Situations in which the person thinks something constructive can be done or that are appraised as requiring more information favor problem-focused coping, whereas those having to be acceptedfavor emotion-focused coping. There are no effects associated with age, and gender differences emerge only in problem-focused coping: Men use more problem-focused coping than women at work and in situations having to be accepted and requiring more information. Contrary to the cultural stereotype, there are no gender differences in emotionfocused coping.

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/2136617

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

Items 101–197 of 197

Metadata

Authors
Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S.
Venue
Journal of Health and Social Behavior
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
1980-09
Volume
21
Issue
3
Pages
219
ISSN
0022-1465 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2307/2136617
OpenAlex
W2313987504
Cited by
6,328
References
1
FWCI
38.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.