Crises like the COVID-19 pandemic can trigger concerns about loss of employment and changes in work conditions, and thereby increase job insecurity. Yet, little is known about how perceived job insecurity subsequently unfolds over time and how individual differences in habitual coping moderate such a trajectory. Using longitudinal data from 899 US-based participants across 5 waves (March to June 2020), we investigated the trajectory of job insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic and how this trajectory depended on habitual coping strategies such as planning, reappraisal, and distraction. Results from latent growth curve analysis indicated that, on average, job insecurity initially increased and then decreased after signing of the coronavirus stimulus bill, suggesting a pattern of shock followed by adjustment. During the shock phase, habitual use of distraction was related to less increases in job insecurity. Later during the adjustment phase, decreases in job insecurity were more pronounced for individuals with higher habitual use of planning, but were not affected by reappraisal or distraction. Hence, different coping strategies appear beneficial in different phases of adjustment, and the beneficial effect of planning may take time to manifest. Altogether, our study highlights how in the context of extraordinary and uncontrollable events, coping strategies can impact the trajectory of a stressor.

像 COVID-19 大流行这样的危机会引发人们对失业和工作条件变化的担忧，从而增加工作的不稳定性。然而，人们对感知到的工作不安全感随后如何随着时间的推移而展开，以及习惯性应对中的个体差异如何缓和这种轨迹知之甚少。我们使用 5 波（2020 年 3 月至 2020 年 6 月）来自 899 名美国参与者的纵向数据，调查了 COVID-19 大流行期间工作不安全的轨迹，以及该轨迹如何依赖于习惯性应对策略，例如计划、重新评估和分散注意力。潜在增长曲线分析的结果表明，平均而言，在冠状病毒刺激法案签署后，工作不安全感先增加后减少，表明先震后调整的模式。在冲击阶段，习惯性使用分心与工作不安全感增加较少有关。在调整阶段的后期，对于经常使用计划的个人来说，工作不安全感的减少更为明显，但不受重新评估或分心的影响。因此，不同的应对策略在不同的调整阶段似乎是有益的，而计划的有益效果可能需要时间才能体现出来。总而言之，我们的研究强调了在异常和无法控制的事件的背景下，应对策略如何影响压力源的轨迹。不同的应对策略在不同的调整阶段似乎是有益的，而规划的有益效果可能需要时间才能体现出来。总而言之，我们的研究强调了在异常和无法控制的事件的背景下，应对策略如何影响压力源的轨迹。不同的应对策略在不同的调整阶段似乎是有益的，而规划的有益效果可能需要时间才能体现出来。总而言之，我们的研究强调了在异常和无法控制的事件的背景下，应对策略如何影响压力源的轨迹。