Journal of Youth and Adolescence ( IF 5.625 ) Pub Date : 2021-01-25 , DOI: 10.1007/s10964-021-01398-z Sarah E. D. Perzow , Bethany C. Bray , Martha E. Wadsworth , Jami F. Young , Benjamin L. Hankin
Coping that is adaptive in low-stress environments can be ineffective or detrimental in the context of poverty. Identifying coping profiles among adolescents facing varying levels of stress can increase understanding of when and for whom coping may be most adaptive. The present study applied latent profile analysis (LPA) to identify coping profiles in two distinct samples of adolescents: a community sample of youth aged 11–16 years (N = 374, Mage = 13.14, 53% girls), and a low-SES sample of youth aged 12–18 years (N = 304, Mage = 14.56, 55% girls). The ten coping subscales of the Responses to Stress Questionnaire were included as indicators in the LPAs (problem solving, emotion regulation, emotion expression, acceptance, positive thinking, cognitive restructuring, distraction, denial, wishful thinking, and avoidance). Five profiles were identified in the community sample: Inactive, Low Engagement, Cognitive, Engaged, and Active Copers. All but the Low Engagement Copers profile were also identified in the low-SES sample, suggesting that adolescents employ similar coping strategies across contexts, but fewer low-SES adolescents engage in lower levels of coping. Profiles differed by gender and symptoms of internalizing psychopathology. Inactive copers in both samples were more likely to be male. Engaged Copers reported the lowest symptom levels whereas Active Copers reported higher symptoms. Cognitive Copers reported higher levels of anxious and depressive symptoms in the low-SES sample only, suggesting that this pattern of coping may be protective only in less stressful contexts. Elucidating within-person coping patterns is a promising avenue for targeting interventions to those most likely to benefit.
中文翻译:
青少年应对中的个体差异:比较社区样本和低SES样本以了解背景中的应对
在贫困情况下,在低压力环境中适应性应对可能会无效或有害。在面临不同压力水平的青少年中确定应对方式可以增加对应对的时间和对象的适应性。本研究应用了潜在特征分析(LPA)来识别两个截然不同的青少年样本中的应对特征:社区样本为11-16岁的青少年(N = 374,M年龄 = 13.14,53%的女孩),以及SES样本为12-18岁的年轻人(N = 304,M年龄 = 14.56,55%的女孩)。LPA中包括十个应对压力问卷的应对量表作为指标(问题解决,情绪调节,情绪表达,接受,积极思考,认知重构,分心,否认,一厢情愿和回避)。在社区样本中确定了五个配置文件:不活跃,参与度低,认知,参与和主动Copers。在低SES样本中还发现了除“低参与度Copers”外的所有信息,这表明青少年在不同情境中采用相似的应对策略,但较少的低SES青少年进行较低水平的应对。概况因性别和内在心理病理学症状而异。两个样本中无效的铜都更可能是男性。参与活动的Copers报告的症状水平最低,而Active Copers报告的症状较高。认知科珀斯报告仅在低SES样本中出现较高水平的焦虑和抑郁症状,这表明这种应对方式仅在压力较小的情况下才具有保护作用。阐明人际应对方式是将干预措施针对最有可能受益的人群的有前途的途径。