1. ABSTRACT PROCEDURE CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES
COPING STYLE AS PREDICTED BY PERSONALITY AND ATTACHMENT
Lisa A. Best and Lilly E. Both
University of New Brunswick, Saint John
Canada
Personality characteristics and styles of attachment affect how individuals react in different situations and may affect how they cope. The purpose of this study was to examine if personality and attachment styles predicted coping styles. In total, 271 females and 96 males (mean age = 20.6 years) completed a series of questionnaires to assess their personality (NEO-PI-R), attachment (Relationship Scales Questionnaire), and coping skills (Ways of Coping Checklist). Regression analyses indicated that higher Extraversion, Openness, and Conscientiousness, as well as a Fearful attachment style predicted Problem-focused coping (R2=.19). The use of Support-seeking was predicted by being older and female as well as having higher Extraversion and Conscientiousness and lower Agreeableness (R2=.15). Approximately 41% of the variation in Emotion-focused coping was accounted for by higher Neuroticism and Extraversion, as well as a Fearful attachment style. Higher Neuroticism and Extraversion accounted for 25% of the variability in Self-Blame. Wishful thinking was predicted by higher Neuroticism and Openness, as well as a Fearful Attachment Style (R2=.39). A Fearful attachment style and Higher Neuroticism accounted for 33% of the variability in Avoidance-Focused Coping. In general, individuals who are more likely to deal with a problem head-on or seek the support of others are more likely to be extroverted and conscientious. On the other hand, emotion focused coping, such as self- blame, wishful thinking, and avoidance, was associated with higher neuroticism and a fearful attachment style. These results support the theory that basic inherent traits affect how individuals react in different situations.
ABSTRACT
PROCEDURE
The participants were 367 (96 men; 271 women) Introductory Psychology students attending an Eastern Canadian university.
The mean age of participants was 20.6 years.
Volunteers completed a series of questionnaires.
Attachment Security – Relationship Scales Questionnaire (Griffin & Bartholomew, 1994)
NEO-PI-R – personality inventory (Costa & McCrae, 1992)
Coping – The Ways of Coping Checklist (Vitaliano, Russo, Carr, Maiuro & Becker, 1985).
A series of hierarchical regression analyses was conducted predicting each of the coping styles.
CONCLUSIONS
Inherited personality traits influence coping styles and account for a significant proportion of variance
More variability was accounted for when emotion focused coping styles were used
Individuals who are both Extraverted and Conscientious are more likely to deal with the source of a problem or to seek the support of others
Individuals with a fearful attachment style coupled with higher neuroticism are more likely to used emotion focused coping styles such as wishful thinking and avoidance
Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, Florida: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Griffin, D., & Bartholomew, K. (1994). The metaphysics of measurement: The case of adult attachment. In K. Bartholomew and D. Perlman (Eds), Advances in personal relationships, Vol. 5: Attachment process in adulthood (pp ). London: Jessica Kingsley.
Vitaliano, P.P., Russo, J., Carr, J.E., Maiuro, R.D., & Becker, J. (1985). The ways of coping checklist: Revision and psychometric properties. Multivariate Behavioural Research, 20, 3-26.
REFERENCES
Coping Style
STEP 1
Age and Gender
STEP 2
Personality
Neuroticism
Extraversion
Openness
Agreeableness
Conscientiousness
STEP 3
Attachment
Secure
Dismissing
Preoccupied
Fearful
Problem Focused
Coping
R2 = .19
F (11,341) = 7.47,
p < .001
↑Extraversion
↑Openness
↑Conscientious
↑Fearful
Attachment
Support Seeking
R2 = .15
F (11,341) = 5.42,
Older
Female
↓Agreeableness
Emotion Focused Coping
R2 = .41
F (11,340) = 21.14,
↑Neuroticism
Self Blame
R2 = .25
F (11,339) = 10.09,
Wishful Thinking
R2 = .39
F (11,340) = 19.49,
Avoidance Coping
R2 = .33
F (11,340) = 15.38, p < .001
↑Fearful Attachment