Content area
Full Text
Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, Vol. 12, No. 1, 1993, pp. 56-72
JEFFREY P. BJORCKFuller Theological Seminary
LAWRENCE H. COHEN
University of Delaware
College students participated in an analogue study designed to compare threat, loss, and challenge life events on the elicitation of specific coping strategies. Subjects responded to items from Folkman and Lazarus's (1988) Ways of Coping Questionnaire in addition to new items designed to tap religious coping. A series of factor analyses produced the specific coping scales. Subjects predicted more use of Problem Solving, and less use of Religious Coping and Wishful Thinking,
when confronted with Challenges compared to Threats and Losses. For Threats compared to Losses, subjects planned to use more Problem Solving and Religious Coping, and less Emotional Social Support. The findings support the value of studying coping responses as a function of stressor type, and highlight the
potential importance of religious coping as a specific coping strategy.
In Lazarus and Folkman's (1984) coping theory, both quantitative and qualitative aspects of stressful events contribute to their appraisal. Life
events can be classified on such quantitative dimensions as controlla bility, severity, and chronicity (e.g., McCrae, 1992; Vitaliano, DeWolfe,
Maiuro, Russo, & Katon, 1990). Stressful events can also be appraised
as threats, losses, or challenges. These specific qualitative appraisals
can result in distinct emotions (e.g., sadness from loss) (Folkman &
This article is based dissertation completed by Jeffrey P. Bjorck under the direction
of Lawrence H. Cohen in the Department of Psychology at the University of Delaware. We extremely grateful to Richard Gorsuch and Robert McCrae for feedback earlier versions of this article. We acknowledge the helpful comments of Annette Stanton and four anonymous reviewers.
Correspondence concerning this article should be sent to Jeffrey P. Bjorck, Graduate School of Psychology, Fuller Theological Seminary, 180 North Oakland Ave., Pasadena,
CA 91101.
56
COPING WITH THREATS, LOSSES,
AND CHALLENGES
THREATS, LOSSES, AND CHALLENGES 57
Lazarus, 1985), differing physiological responses (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984), and divergent levels of adjustment (e.g., Folkman, Lazarus,
Dunkel-Schetter, DeLongis, & Gruen, 1986).
Lazarus and Folkman (1984) further propose that qualitative ap
praisals elicit different coping responses. Losses require facing damage
that has already occurred, whereas threats and challenges involve
anticipatory coping with potential harm/ loss and benefit/ growth, respectively. As...