Differences Among Positive Coping Strategies in Predicting Subjective Well-Being - Essay Example

? Article critique 27 July Introduction This essay reviews the article, “Silver Linings and Candles in the Dark: Differences Among Positive Coping Strategies in Predicting Subjective Well-Being,” by Michelle N. Shiota (2006). Shiota (2006) aimed to understand how different “positive coping strategies” impact “positive aspects of well-being” and how different “objective severity” or the kind of stressors affect the respondent's choice of positive coping strategies (p.335). The study did not have any hypotheses. The independent variables are the stressors and the dependent variables are the coping styles. There is no separate chapter on literature review and Shiota did not provide a theoretical framework. Nevertheless, she gave the context, direction, and overview of her research. She mentioned that several studies have been done on different coping mechanisms and how they improved well-being, but there is a gap in literature regarding whether these strategies are effective in promoting well-being in general or if they produce specific kinds of well-being only, and how each coping mechanism addresses particular stressors. The study intends to contribute to the field of study by examining differentiated responses to diverse stressors and the choice of diverse coping mechanism styles. Shiota provided a background that supports the need for her research, because her study involves more coping strategies (instead of individual coping styles analyzed only) and tackles unanswered research questions. She should have included, however, the most recent studies on the same topic and what their outcomes are. There should also have been a theoretical framework subsection that discussed her concepts and measures more. Her theoretical perspectives should have been more researched and expressed in this article, so that readers would understand her theoretical biases and beliefs. Methods The research design was a qualitative, correlational research using descriptive data-collection methods. Shiota used coping diaries and the Positive and Negative Activation Schedule (PANAS) to determine the participants' stressors and the range of coping styles they used in response to their stressors. This research design is suitable to the research objectives, because the basic questions of Shiota concerns asking “what” and “how”. These questions demand detailed and specific answers from the respondents that may not be adequately collected through interviews or surveys alone. A diary is a suitable data-collection measure that provides privacy to respondents and allows them to have time to focus on what they feel and how they coped with their stressful moments in life. Shiota standardized answers also by having participants answer open-ended questions, such as “What, if anything, did you do during or after the negative event to make yourself feel better?,” after identifying negative occurrences in their day. Sampling The sampling strategy was convenience sampling. This was done for its convenience and it has lower costs than random sampling. The respondents were undergraduates enrolled in a psychology subject at a large West Coast university and they totaled one-hundred forty-eight. The first sample was made of 63% women, 43% percent Asian American, 32% European American, 11% Hispanics, and 13% of another ethnicity and the average age was 21.5 years. Around 38 percent was lost from the last sample, because they failed to return the diaries in time, or their diaries were incomplete or could not be coded. The probability sampling size is no longer used. The sampling is not considered as representative of the population. The participation rate is 62%, which is relatively high. The author no longer addressed differences between those who responded properly and those who did not. Measures Shiota used coping diaries and the Positive and Negative Activation Schedule (PANAS) to identify the participants' stressors and the range of coping styles they used in response to their stressors. The instruments used were stressor tables and diaries. The instruments were developed according to the research purposes and specific data needs. They identified the negative events and measured moods for the day, where negative and positive activation factors were identified. The instruments are considered reliable to the extent that history issues have been decreased, since the participants would record negative events immediately after they happen. They do not need to recall past events, where their memories and biases might impact their diaries' content and self-evaluation of these stressors. A diary is also an unobstrusive measure that can increase the honesty of answers provided by participants. The instruments are not validated in a pilot study, although the PANAS is already a tested instrument. There should have been other tests to examine the validity of the measures. Internal validity is threatened by different interpretations of the same questions, due to language and cultural differences. The instruments, nevertheless, are considered appropriate, because a diary is a suitable data-collection measure that provides privacy to respondents and allows them to have time to focus on what they feel and how they coped with their stressful moments in life. Data Analysis Responses to negative events are coded using nonmutually exclusive coding system. Research assistants also coded the objective severity of each negative event on a scale from 0 to 4, and the scores demonstrated the duration and intensity of probable outcomes of negative events. The following units were also measured: “The minima, maxima, means, and standard deviations of the six coping strategy frequencies.” They are appropriate because they provide answers to the objectives of the research and they could describe the different coping mechanisms used for diverse stressors. Furthermore, Spearman’s rank-order correlations were used for each of the coping strategy indexes and PANAS Positive and Negative Activation scores. The information was also discussed and described clearly and accurately, where the data and their implications were explored. For instance, Table 2 includes the correlation between the “positive activation scores and the positive reappraisal and sensory events” and they were also “negatively correlated with distraction coping index.” Findings showed that participants used one or two coping styles more frequently than others. Dispositional employment of the two strategies generally created positive emotions during or after negative events, and positive reappraisal and creating positive sensory events were connected with higher perceptions of energy, strength, enjoyment, and engagement, as the PANAS Positive Activation scale showed. Producing positive sensory events also related to lower Negative Activation scores on the PANAS. Eating was also prominent as a coping style, but did not improve well-being. When participants experienced more negative events, the more coping mechanisms were used also. The coping strategy also tended to support the nature of the problem, such as using social support for relationship problems. Findings The findings were discussed comprehensively, but not enough studies are mentioned to support insights or assertions. They are seen as valid, because they capture the intended answers of the research. Explanations were also given for new or unexpected findings. Shiota increased the validity of her findings by having participants evaluate their thoughts on particular negative events for each day, because of the diary data-collection method. This improves the memory of events and how participants responded to them, instead of looking back to past events that may be clouded with memory issues. The findings may not apply to intense stressors, since participants reported minor hassles or stressors. Further longitudinal research on coping styles were recommended. The confounding variables are boredom of participants if they do not feel they need the diary and they might also feel forced to answer the diaries. This can impact the validity and reliability of the findings. Furthermore, the author did not consider another interpretation for use of positive coping mechanisms for negative events, such as gender and culture acting as confounding variables. It is possible that females may cope better than males in other concerns and that some cultures are more resilient to certain kinds of stressors. Reference Shiota, M.N. (2006).Silver linings and candles in the dark: differences among positive coping strategies in predicting subjective well-being. Emotion, 6 (2), 335-9. Read More