Sun Tingyue, Yap Yang, Tung Yan Chi, Bei Bei, Wiley Joshua F
School of Psychological Sciences and Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
School of Health and Biomedical Sciences, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia.
J Affect Disord. 2023 Jul 1;332:309-317. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2023.03.090. Epub 2023 Apr 3.
Emotional reactivity predicts poor health and psychopathology. Despite its theoretical importance, little research has tested whether coping predicts emotional reactivity to stressors. We analyse three studies to test this hypothesis for negative (NA) and positive affect (PA) reactivity to daily stressors.
422 Participants (72.5 % females, M = 22.79 ± 5.36) came from three longitudinal, ecological momentary assessment (EMA) studies across 7-15 days (ACES N = 190; DESTRESS N = 134; SHS N = 98). Coping was measured at baseline. NA, PA, and daily stressors were assessed via EMA. Mixed effects linear models tested whether coping predicted NA and PA reactivity, defined as their slope on within- and between-person daily stressors.
Behavioural disengagement and mental disengagement coping predicted greater within-person NA reactivity across all studies (all p < .01, all f = 0.01). Denial coping predicted greater within-person NA reactivity in ACES and DESTRESS (both p < .01, f from 0.02-0.03) and between-person in ACES and SHS (both p < .01, f from 0.02 to 0.03). For approach-oriented coping, only active planning coping predicted lower within-person NA reactivity and only in DESTRESS (p < .01, f = 0.02). Coping did not predict PA reactivity (all p > .05).
Our findings cannot be generalised to children or older adults. Emotional reactivity to daily stressors may differ from severe or traumatic stressors. Although data were longitudinal, the observational design precludes establishing causality.
Avoidance-oriented coping strategies predicted greater NA reactivity to daily stressors with small effect sizes. Few and inconsistent results emerged for approach-oriented coping and PA reactivity. Clinically, our results suggest that reducing reliance on avoidance-oriented coping may reduce NA reactivity to daily stressors.
情绪反应性预示着健康状况不佳和精神病理学问题。尽管其在理论上具有重要性，但很少有研究检验应对方式是否能预测对压力源的情绪反应性。我们分析三项研究来检验这一假设，即针对日常压力源的消极（NA）和积极情绪（PA）反应性。
422名参与者（72.5%为女性，M = 22.79 ± 5.36）来自三项为期7 - 15天的纵向生态瞬时评估（EMA）研究（ACES研究N = 190；减压研究N = 134；SHS研究N = 98）。应对方式在基线时进行测量。NA、PA和日常压力源通过EMA进行评估。混合效应线性模型检验应对方式是否能预测NA和PA反应性，NA和PA反应性定义为它们在个体内和个体间日常压力源上的斜率。
在所有研究中，行为脱离和心理脱离应对方式预示着个体内更大的NA反应性（所有p <.01，所有f = 0.01）。否认应对方式在ACES研究和减压研究中预示着个体内更大的NA反应性（两者p <.01，f从0.02至0.03），在ACES研究和SHS研究中预示着个体间更大的NA反应性（两者p <.01，f从0.02至0.03）。对于以接近为导向的应对方式，只有积极规划应对方式预示着个体内较低的NA反应性，且仅在减压研究中如此（p <.01，f = 0.02）。应对方式不能预测PA反应性（所有p >.05）。
我们的研究结果不能推广到儿童或老年人。对日常压力源的情绪反应性可能与严重或创伤性压力源不同。尽管数据是纵向的，但观察性设计排除了确定因果关系的可能性。
以回避为导向的应对策略预示着对日常压力源更大的NA反应性，效应量较小。对于以接近为导向的应对方式和PA反应性，结果很少且不一致。在临床上，我们的结果表明，减少对以回避为导向的应对方式的依赖可能会降低对日常压力源的NA反应性。
