1. The Theory of Stress and Coping Among Women Experiencing Intimate Partner Violence Amanda Shortell December 17 th, 2009 SB 721

2. What is stress? (2) According to Lazarus: –Single or successive person-environment interactions –Always changing –Reciprocal: influence is bi-directional –Perceived by the individual to be demanding or overwhelm his or her personal resources and perhaps jeopardize well-being Diverges from more mainstream concepts of stress as a stimulus, such as an event, diagnosis, an approaching deadline or an uncomfortable conversation, or as a response to a stimulus, for example anguish or worry

3. The Theory of Stress and Coping Key Concepts (1,2,3) Stress –Person-Environment Interaction Cognitive Appraisal –Primary appraisal Irrelevant, harm or loss, threat, or challenge –Secondary appraisal What can be done? Coping: According to Lazarus and Folkman, Coping refers to cognitive and behavioral efforts to master, reduce, or tolerate the internal and/or external demands that are created by stressful transactions (3, p.843). –Emotion-focused coping –Problem-focused coping Other components to consider: –Control –Personal and environmental constraints –Extremity of threat

4. Coping Among Women Experiencing Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) Stress –Victimization by intimate partner violence Cognitive Appraisal –Primary appraisal: A womans perception of the significance of IPV and the threat it poses as a stressor Influenced by her dependence on her abuser, commitments to family or within a community, her beliefs about family values, religion, her racial/ethnic group or personal principles –Secondary appraisal: A womans personal evaluation of the situation, her options, control, and resources for dealing with the stressor Coping –Emotion-focused coping Ex: constructing positive comparisons, discredit the stakes at risk, and concentrating on positive outcomes of a negative situation –Problem-focused coping Ex: problem-solving, decision-making, or direct action

5. Constraints of the Theory of Stress and Coping In reality, the coping process cannot always be explained through theoretical definitions. The theory lacks room for explaining outside factors dictating a situation and the choices available to women experiencing intimate partner violence, aside from merely acknowledging that they exist. Coping, itself, is reactionary, so interventions at this point in a womans abusive relationship are also reactionary responses to a larger problem.

6. Survival-Focused Coping: Coping Among Women Experiencing Intimate Partner Violence Proposed by researchers from Boston College and Harvard University –Survival-focused coping is distinct from either emotion or problem-focused coping. Instead, it is aimed at surviving in the short term, meeting basic needs, and keeping oneself and ones loved ones as safe as possible (5, p.318) Key component: Microcontrol (5) Criticism: Makes females vulnerable to victim- blaming

7. References 1. Glanz, K., Schwartz, M. Stress, Coping, and Health Behavior. In: Glanz, K., Rimer, B., Viswanath, K., ed. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. 4 th ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2008: 211-236. 2. Lazarus, R. Coping Theory and Research: Past, Present, and Future. Psycholsom Med. 1993; 55:234-247. 3. Folkman, S. Personal Control and Stress and Coping Processes: A Theoretical Analysis. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1984; 46(4):839-852. 4. Endler, N., Parker, J. Multidimensional Assessment of Coping: A Critical Evaluation. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1990; 58(5):844-854. 5. Goodman, L., Smyth, K., Borges, A., Singer, R. When Crises Collide: How Intimate Partner Violence and Poverty Intersect to Shape Womens Mental Health and Coping?. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2009; 10(4):306- 329. 6. Nurius, P., Furrey, J., Berliner, L. Coping Capacity Among Women with Abusive Partners. Violence Vict. 1992; 7(2):229-243. 7. Carlson, B. A Stress and Coping Approach to Interventions with Abused Women. Fam Relat. 1997; 46(3):291-298. 8. Thoits, P. Stress, Coping, and Social Support Processes: Where Are We? What Next?. J Health Soc Behav. 1995; Extra Issue:53-79. 9. Brady, S., Tschann, J., Pasch, L., Flores, E., Ozer, E. Cognitive Coping Moderates the Association between Violent Victimization by Peers and Substance Use among Adolescents. J Pediatr Psychol. 2008; 1-7. 10. Morrow, S., Smith, M. Constructions of Survival and Coping by Women Who Have Survived Childhood Sexual Abuse. J Couns Psychol. 1995; 42(1):24-33. 11. Walker, L., Browne, A. Gender and victimization by intimates. J Pers. 1985; June:179-195. 12. Gold, E. Long-Term Effects of Sexual Victimization in Childhood: An Attributional Approach. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1986; 54(4):471-475. 13. Walker, L. Psychology and Violence Against Women. Am Psychol. 1989; 44(4):695-702. 14. Segal, D. Self-reported history of sexual coercion and rape negatively impacts resilience to suicide among women students. Death Stud. 2009; 33:848-855. 15. Swanberg, J., Macke, C., Logan, TK. Working Women Making It Work: Intimate Partner Violence, Employment, and Workplace Support. J Interpers Violence. 2007; 22:292-310.