The Role of Meaning in Stress and Coping in Terms of Both Positive and Negative Outcomes - Literature review Example

The Role of Meaning in Stress and Coping In Terms Of both Positive and Negative Outcomes Name: University: Date: The Role of Meaning in Stress and Coping In Terms Of both Positive and Negative Outcomes Introduction For many years, psychologists and philosophers have examined the mystifying positive effects that can happen following severely traumatic life events such as serious illness, Holocaust, natural disasters or other distressing events. Even though somewhat understudied scientifically than the negative outcomes, Updegraff and Taylor (2000) posit that positive outcomes of stressful events in life are becoming more studied by researchers and theorists. Basically, studies examining different stressful events have established that more than 50 per cent of people who have experienced a disturbing life event, have reported some positive outcomes, which include adjustments in life perspective, social relationships and self-perceptions. Theories focussing on the specific relationship between stress (bodily processes) and stressors (external demands) have been categorised in two groups: approaches to psychological stress and systemic stress. According to Kamijo and Yukawa (2014), meaning making model has two forms of meaning; situational meaning and global meaning. Global meaning can be described as people’s general orienting systems and interpretation of various situations, while situational meaning can be defined as meaning concerning a particular instance (Park & Folkman, 1997). Situational meaning consists of the primary situation appraisals, the adjustment of appraised and global meanings, and the outcomes. The present study examines the role of meaning in stress and coping in terms of both positive and negative outcomes. Review of relevant theories Park and Folkman (1997) assert that the general human need for meaning is an extensively acknowledged belief, and this need is as a motivation to comprehend one’s experience as well as to feel that a life of a person has a purpose and significance. Essentially, this need is well comprehended as the need for a purposeful meaning system capable of meeting the meaning-associated needs for transcendence, understanding, and significance. Park (2005) explains a host of explicit meaning-correlated needs such as agency, certainty, social validation, control, identity, values, as well as the need to deal with awareness and shock of mortality. Created with the intention of integrating the different predominant components of research as well as theory on meaning, the meaning making model points out that there are two key features of meaning, situational and global meaning (Park, 2014). Global meaning as examined by Park and Folkman (1997) is an all-encompassing framework of sense of purpose, goals and beliefs, wherein people by means of this framework are able to structure their lives and allocate meanings to certain experiences. Therefore, global meaning focuses on feelings, goals and beliefs. According to Park and Folkman (1997), global meaning affects people’s’ comprehension of both very stressful events and ordinary encounters. When people experience events that are possibly traumatic or stressful, Park (2005) posits that a meaning is assigned to them. In view of this, meanings that are appraised are contrasted to global meaning, and trauma or stress is experienced when aspects of a person’s global meaning system is violated or crushed by the appraised meanings. Arguably, establishing whether an appraised event infringes a person’s global meaning may result in distress because the sense of control is lost. According to the meaning making model, the distress level endured is founded on the level of inconsistency between one’s global goals and beliefs as well as one’s appraised event’s situational meaning. In consequence, distress prompts a hunt for coherence restoration amongst global meaning aspects as well as the event’s assigned appraised meaning. The appraisal concept expounded with regard to stress processes is a crucial factor for comprehending transactions relevant to stress. Basically, concept is anchored on the notion that processes of emotion such as stress rely on the real expectations manifested by an individual with Samson, Glasscoa, Leea, and Gross (2014) to the outcome and significance of a certain experience. Krohne (2002) argues that motivational personalities, values, goals as well as general expectancies are the most crucial factors on an individual side. Specific appraisal patterns result in different forms of stress, and Lazarus and Folkman (1984) as cited by Brannon and Feist (2009) have mentioned three forms of stress: challenge, threat and harm. In this regard, challenge arises from demands that an individual wants to master while threat is the expectation of an imminent harm. Harm has been described by Krohne (2002) as loss or damage that has already taken place. Such different forms of psychological stress are entrenched in certain forms of emotional responses; thus, showing the close relationship between the fields of emotions and stress. Coping as mentioned by Mohamed (2004) is closely associated with the cognitive appraisal concept. Coping has been defined as the behavioural and cognitive efforts made with the intention of mastering, enduring, or reducing the internal and external conflicts and demands amongst them. According to Lazarus and Folkman (1984) coping actions may be differentiated by their emphasis on various aspects of stressful encounter (Naseem & Khalid, 2010). Sometimes, they try to change the realities of individual environment behind stress and negative emotions, The level to which one can integrate an event’s appraised meaning with the global meaning is associated with his/her psychological adjustment to such event. Such events according to Jim, Richardson, Golden-Kreutz, and Andersen (2006) results in acceptance and enable a person to move on. Normally, distress is relieved because of the reduction of incongruity between individual’s situational meaning and global beliefs and they are collaborating toward the sought after goals. Individuals who have failed to resolve discrepancies between their appraised meaning and their global meaning with regard to a specific event normally are caught in the rumination cycle that is related to depression and poorer adjustment. Individuals that focus on the traumatic symptoms and meditate about the implications and causes of such symptoms are inclined to be more depressed as compared to those who take action and concentrate on other things. Global goals and beliefs changes can have positive or negative effects on adjustment, but this depends on their specific content. For instance, brutal crime victims can make meaning from such experiences through adjusting their global beliefs concerning vulnerability as well as controllability toward augmented feebleness and uncontrollability. Restoring and maintaining global beliefs as well as delusions concerning control, certainty, ability to understand, and the world’s magnanimity and the emphasis on realisable goals are all forms of changes within the global meaning, which are related to positive adjustment to life events that are considered stressful. After people’s belief systems are challenged, some people appear to move towards the negative spiral, whereby their beliefs are intensely affected by the negative experience to an extent that the negative event turns out to be the source of negative identity. Review of factors that explain the varied findings in the field Wortmann and Park (2008) assert that when religion is incorporated to individuals’ global meaning systems, their comprehension about God will let know their beliefs regarding people’s nature. The core for many people’s identities according to Wortmann and Park (2008) is religion based on how they comprehend themselves as spiritual or a religious beings and being socially identified with a particular religious group. Basically, religious identity may offer a source of moral supremacy and self-esteem and can strongly impact beliefs concerning control. Wortmann and Park (2008) suggest that religion acts as a function of compensatory control. For many, spirituality acts as a source of meaning; therefore, it strongly affects one’s health. Although some studies show lower spirituality levels in some countries as compared to those conducted in the United States, Park (2014) posits that spirituality seems to be crucial in people’s meaning systems. Every aspect of global meaning can be informed by spirituality, informing beliefs and offering eventual motivation and main goals for existing and recommendations for realizing such goals, in addition to a profound sense of purpose. As observed by Revenson and Singer (2012), spirituality is related to different aspects of general health, which includes morbidity and mortality as well as health behaviours such as adherence. In view of the studies which have analysed the benefits perceived by people after life events that are severely stressful, three main and reliable fields of change have surfaced: life priorities and personal growth; relating with social networks; and (a) self-concept. According to Park and Folkman (1997), the positive outcomes in self-concept after severe life stressors normally entail the belief that a person is strong for such an experience and can handle the misfortunes brought by life. For instance, Taylor (1983) established that survivors of breast cancer normally report a stronger sense of self because of their sickness. Besides that, people normally perceive post-traumatic benefits in social relationships. Crises in life normally coerce people to take a receptive and dependent attitude toward the external environment, which can create the need for help from friends and family. Therefore, when a person is overcome by an unexpected threat, having a steady and helpful social network to depend on can make the person appreciate family and friends and may result in the insight that such social ties have consequently been strengthened. In a number of studies as studies as cited by Updegraff and Taylor (2000), respondents mentioned that having people to depend on during stressful life events is very beneficial. For instance, in a study of men with AIDS, nearly 50 per cent of the respondents reported a stronger sense of belonging and enhanced social relationships. There is a mounting proof that occurrence of stressful events together with improved social support can result in positive outcomes on psychological growth as well as mood. Stress-related benefits are normally perceived on people’s life priorities and personal growth. A study of HIV-positive men as cited by Updegraff and Taylor (2000) showed that 75 per cent of the respondents considered their infection as a personal growth catalyst, which includes time commitments and reprioritisation of values, understanding family and friends more, and achieving life goals. Besides that, majority of cancer patients have reported some positive adjustments in their lives. Park and Folkman (1997) opine that positive outcomes in traumatic events are not erratically related to improved psychological adjustment to such life events. For instance, some people who report high level of perceived growth following a stressful life event also exhibit some positive affectivity as well as optimism. Numerous broadly studied effects of stressful life events consists of negative outcomes, like anxiety and depression as well as cognitive interruptions like ruminations and disturbing thoughts, which may interfere with the normal activities of a person. Research about negative outcomes attributed to stressful life events has been guided by theories such as theory of stress by Horowitz (1976) as well as assumptive world theory by Janoff-Bulman (1992). Traumatic events’ negative responses have been reported in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). PTSD has been described as a syndrome typified by wide-ranging, severe and enduring responses to stress. Such outcomes of a traumatic event may involve negative effects such as distractibility and physiological arousal, which last for some period of time following the termination of the event. Such symptoms have been documented clearly amongst combating soldiers. Still such negative responses may as well take place after rape, physical attack, domestic abuse, or natural/technological disaster. Without a doubt, stressful life events may result in long-term effect to the person, and the images and thoughts of the event can last for years after the subsiding of the actual event. This can happen to the level that such distressing thoughts become intense; thus, diminishing the person’s ability to successfully cope with ensuing stressors, leaving the person exposed to the negative outcomes of future stressful events. Identified Limitations According to Bonanno (2013), meaning making by itself is believed to be beneficial when it leads to meanings made; thus resulting in reduction of discrepancy between global and situational meaning. However, the study does not provided sufficient empirical evidence how people experiencing stressful life events when searching for meaning can found positive or negative adjustment. Besides that, most studies have not explained how the processes of meaning making can enable people to adjust the illness comprehension. Additionally, there are few studies that provide empirical evidence on how meaning making through positive reappraisal can result in improved life meaning and perceived growth. Park (2005) mentions that meaning making efforts normally has a religious aspect, but fails to elaborate if the religious aspect can result in positive or negative outcome. The number of studies that examine how religion can facilitate changes in meaning and adjustment to traumatic experience are exceedingly few. Undoubtedly, there a different types if stressful life events, but most studies have generalised that positive meaning is associated to distress and improved adjustment amongst people with stressful situations. Moreover, a number of studies such Bonanno (2013) point out that accepting stressful events when they occur is a crucial factor in personal growth; however, they have not highlighted the role of meaning to people facing such situations. Summary and Avenues for Future Research In summary, the present study has examined the role of meaning in stress and coping in terms of both positive and negative outcomes. As mentioned in the paper, stressful life events normally generate scores of adverse psychological outcomes such as rumination, anxiety as well as depression. Still, the majority of individuals derive some positive outcomes from such traumatic events, which includes favourable relationships changes, positive adjustments in the self-concept as well as life priorities alteration and personal growth. Generally, the paper points out the significance of considering both the negative and positive changes reported by individuals facing traumatic life events such as HIV, Cancer or loss of a family member. This paper has evidently exhibited that people respond differently to severely traumatic events; therefore, future research should emphasise on people’s responses and the factors as well as processes that affect the outcomes. For instance, the multifaceted relationships between secular and religious aspects of meaning making processes as well as the global meaning are practically unexamined. The majority of the examined studies have focused on sets of variables, but the global meaning non-religious and religious aspects in human lives are intermingled, and the level that spirituality underlies non-religious meaning systems can be the main individual change factor. Further research is needed to examine how the global meaning systems ware connected with meaning making processes. In consideration of the stress-related growth perceptions and their salutatory effects on health as well as behaviour, there is need for further research so as to tie the reported benefits to noticeable outcomes. Other avenues for future research include prospective studies, which will study global meaning in people before diagnosis as well as follow their appraised and global meanings over time and the stages of the sickness. These studies will enable researchers to study the meaning making processes while unfolding in addition to the changes’ determinants in such meanings over time. Besides that, the meaning-associated constructs’ multidimensional nature, especially spirituality needs to be studies further. Rather than using global concepts in stress as well as coping research like optimism, depression or anxiety, there is need for more fertile perspective in studying personality, whereby the focus is on what people try to do rather than examining how they normally respond to stressful/traumatic life events. References Bonanno, G. A. (2013). Meaning making, adversity, and regulatory flexibility. Memory, 21(1), 150–156. Brannon, L., & Feist, J. (2009). Health Psychology: An Introduction to Behavior and Health. New York: Cengage Learning. Jim, H. S., Richardson, S. A., Golden-Kreutz, D. M., & Andersen, B. L. (2006). Strategies Used in Coping With a Cancer Diagnosis Predict Meaning in Life for Survivors. Health Psychology, 25(6), 753–761. Kamijo, N., & Yukawa, S. (2014). Meaning making and rumination : The roles of threat evaluation and personality. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 113, 118 – 123. Krohne, H. W. (2002). Stress and Coping Theories. Research Paper, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Mainz. Mohamed, N. E. (2004). The Role of Personal and Social Resources and Coping For Finding Meaning in Cancer: A Longitudinal Study. Berlin: Nihal Elamin Mohamed. Naseem, Z., & Khalid, R. (2010). Positive Thinking in Coping with Stress and Health outcomes: Literature Review. Journal of Research and Reflections in Education, 4(1), 42 -61. Park, C. L. (2005). Religion as a Meaning-Making Framework in Coping with Life Stress. Journal of Social Issues, 61(4), 707–729. Park, C. L. (2014). Meaning, spirituality, and health: a brief introduction. Rev. Pistis Prax, 6(1), 17-31. Park, C. L., & Folkman, S. (1997). Meaning in the Context of Stress and Coping. Review of General Psychology, 1(2), 115-144. Revenson, T. A., & Singer, J. E. (2012). Handbook of Health Psychology. New York: Psychology Press. Samson, A. C., Glasscoa, A. L., Leea, I. A., & Gross, J. J. (2014). Humorous Coping and Serious Reappraisal: Short-Term and Longer-Term Effects. Europe's Journal of Psychology, 10(3), 571–581. Taylor, S. (1983). Adjustment to threatening events: A theory of cognitive adaptation. American Psychologist, 38, 1161-1173. Updegraff, J. A., & Taylor, S. E. (2000). From vulnerability to growth: Positive and negative effects of stressful life events. In J. H. Harvey, & E. D. Miller, Loss and trauma: General and close relationship perspectives (pp. 3-28). New York, NY: Brunner-Routledge. Wortmann, J. H., & Park, C. L. (2008). Religion and spirituality in adjustment following bereavement: an integrative review. Death Studies, 32, 703–736. Read More

Created with the intention of integrating the different predominant components of research as well as theory on meaning, the meaning making model points out that there are two key features of meaning, situational and global meaning (Park, 2014). Global meaning as examined by Park and Folkman (1997) is an all-encompassing framework of sense of purpose, goals and beliefs, wherein people by means of this framework are able to structure their lives and allocate meanings to certain experiences. Therefore, global meaning focuses on feelings, goals and beliefs.

According to Park and Folkman (1997), global meaning affects people’s’ comprehension of both very stressful events and ordinary encounters. When people experience events that are possibly traumatic or stressful, Park (2005) posits that a meaning is assigned to them. In view of this, meanings that are appraised are contrasted to global meaning, and trauma or stress is experienced when aspects of a person’s global meaning system is violated or crushed by the appraised meanings. Arguably, establishing whether an appraised event infringes a person’s global meaning may result in distress because the sense of control is lost.

According to the meaning making model, the distress level endured is founded on the level of inconsistency between one’s global goals and beliefs as well as one’s appraised event’s situational meaning. In consequence, distress prompts a hunt for coherence restoration amongst global meaning aspects as well as the event’s assigned appraised meaning. The appraisal concept expounded with regard to stress processes is a crucial factor for comprehending transactions relevant to stress. Basically, concept is anchored on the notion that processes of emotion such as stress rely on the real expectations manifested by an individual with Samson, Glasscoa, Leea, and Gross (2014) to the outcome and significance of a certain experience.

Krohne (2002) argues that motivational personalities, values, goals as well as general expectancies are the most crucial factors on an individual side. Specific appraisal patterns result in different forms of stress, and Lazarus and Folkman (1984) as cited by Brannon and Feist (2009) have mentioned three forms of stress: challenge, threat and harm. In this regard, challenge arises from demands that an individual wants to master while threat is the expectation of an imminent harm. Harm has been described by Krohne (2002) as loss or damage that has already taken place.

Such different forms of psychological stress are entrenched in certain forms of emotional responses; thus, showing the close relationship between the fields of emotions and stress. Coping as mentioned by Mohamed (2004) is closely associated with the cognitive appraisal concept. Coping has been defined as the behavioural and cognitive efforts made with the intention of mastering, enduring, or reducing the internal and external conflicts and demands amongst them. According to Lazarus and Folkman (1984) coping actions may be differentiated by their emphasis on various aspects of stressful encounter (Naseem & Khalid, 2010).

Sometimes, they try to change the realities of individual environment behind stress and negative emotions, The level to which one can integrate an event’s appraised meaning with the global meaning is associated with his/her psychological adjustment to such event. Such events according to Jim, Richardson, Golden-Kreutz, and Andersen (2006) results in acceptance and enable a person to move on. Normally, distress is relieved because of the reduction of incongruity between individual’s situational meaning and global beliefs and they are collaborating toward the sought after goals.

Individuals who have failed to resolve discrepancies between their appraised meaning and their global meaning with regard to a specific event normally are caught in the rumination cycle that is related to depression and poorer adjustment. Individuals that focus on the traumatic symptoms and meditate about the implications and causes of such symptoms are inclined to be more depressed as compared to those who take action and concentrate on other things.

Read More