Bjorck J P, Cuthbertson W, Thurman J W, Lee Y S
Graduate School of Psychology, Fuller Theological Seminary, Pasadena, CA 91101, USA.
J Soc Psychol. 2001 Aug;141(4):421-42. doi: 10.1080/00224540109600563.
The authors examined appraisal, coping, and distress among Korean American, Filipino American, and Caucasian American Protestants. No interaction effects emerged among ethnic groups, but there were significant ethnic main effects for appraisal and coping. Compared with the Caucasian Americans, both Asian American groups appraised stressors as more challenging, and the Korean Americans appraised them also as greater losses. Both Asian American groups reported using more strategies of accepting responsibility, religious coping, distancing, and escape-avoidance than the Caucasian Americans did; the Filipino Americans also reported more problem-solving strategies than the Caucasian Americans. For all participants, challenge appraisals predicted adaptive coping (problem solving and positive reappraisal) and less distress. Problem solving, seeking social support, and positive reappraisal predicted less distress; self-control, accepting responsibility, and escape-avoidance predicted greater distress. The authors stressed the value of assessing ethnicity in coping research.
作者研究了韩裔美国人、菲律宾裔美国人和欧裔美国新教徒的评价、应对方式和痛苦程度。种族群体之间未出现交互效应,但在评价和应对方式上存在显著的种族主效应。与欧裔美国人相比,两个亚裔美国人群体都将压力源评估为更具挑战性,韩裔美国人还将其评估为更大的损失。两个亚裔美国人群体都报告称,他们比欧裔美国人更多地使用承担责任、宗教应对、疏离和逃避回避等策略;菲律宾裔美国人还报告称,他们比欧裔美国人更多地使用解决问题的策略。对于所有参与者来说,挑战性评价预测了适应性应对(解决问题和积极重新评价)以及较少的痛苦。解决问题、寻求社会支持和积极重新评价预测了较少的痛苦;自我控制、承担责任和逃避回避预测了更大的痛苦。作者强调了在应对研究中评估种族的价值。