Factors Influencing Farmers' Use of Adaptive and Maladaptive Coping Strategies.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Journal of Agromedicine Pub Date : 2023-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-04 DOI:10.1080/1059924X.2023.2242835
Amanda J Holmstrom, Jong In Lim, Yue Zhang, Gwyn Shelle
{"title":"Factors Influencing Farmers' Use of Adaptive and Maladaptive Coping Strategies.","authors":"Amanda J Holmstrom,&nbsp;Jong In Lim,&nbsp;Yue Zhang,&nbsp;Gwyn Shelle","doi":"10.1080/1059924X.2023.2242835","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Chronic stress is associated with a variety of negative outcomes for farmers in the United States (U.S) and worldwide, who face near-constant exposure to internal (e.g. family conflict) and external (e.g. weather) stressors. Research indicates that farmers' stress may be reduced by engaging in adaptive coping strategies and avoiding maladaptive coping strategies. However, little is known about what predicts their coping strategy use. Informed by the transactional theory of stress and coping, the present manuscript seeks to identify factors associated with U.S. farmers' use of adaptive and maladaptive coping strategies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>U.S. farmers (<i>N</i> = 135) completed survey assessments of factors theorized to be associated with coping strategy choice (maladaptive beliefs about farm stress management, farm stress management self-efficacy, age, and sex) as well as measures of adaptive and maladaptive coping.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Farm stress management self-efficacy was a significant, positive predictor of adaptive coping, and maladaptive beliefs about farm stress management were a significant, positive predictor of maladaptive coping. Maladaptive beliefs about farm stress management and farm stress management self-efficacy interacted to predict maladaptive coping, such that the positive relationship between maladaptive beliefs about farm stress management and maladaptive coping was significant at higher levels of self-efficacy. Sex was unrelated to coping strategies, and age was negatively associated with maladaptive coping strategies but unassociated with adaptive coping strategies.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings point to the utility of increasing farm stress self-management self-efficacy to increase farmers' adaptive coping and reducing maladaptive beliefs about farm stress management to reduce maladaptive coping. Efforts to promote adaptive coping by increasing self-efficacy should also target maladaptive beliefs farmers hold toward stress management, because increasing self-efficacy may also increase the likelihood of maladaptive coping when maladaptive beliefs are present.</p>","PeriodicalId":49172,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agromedicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Agromedicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2023.2242835","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Chronic stress is associated with a variety of negative outcomes for farmers in the United States (U.S) and worldwide, who face near-constant exposure to internal (e.g. family conflict) and external (e.g. weather) stressors. Research indicates that farmers' stress may be reduced by engaging in adaptive coping strategies and avoiding maladaptive coping strategies. However, little is known about what predicts their coping strategy use. Informed by the transactional theory of stress and coping, the present manuscript seeks to identify factors associated with U.S. farmers' use of adaptive and maladaptive coping strategies.

Methods: U.S. farmers (N = 135) completed survey assessments of factors theorized to be associated with coping strategy choice (maladaptive beliefs about farm stress management, farm stress management self-efficacy, age, and sex) as well as measures of adaptive and maladaptive coping.

Results: Farm stress management self-efficacy was a significant, positive predictor of adaptive coping, and maladaptive beliefs about farm stress management were a significant, positive predictor of maladaptive coping. Maladaptive beliefs about farm stress management and farm stress management self-efficacy interacted to predict maladaptive coping, such that the positive relationship between maladaptive beliefs about farm stress management and maladaptive coping was significant at higher levels of self-efficacy. Sex was unrelated to coping strategies, and age was negatively associated with maladaptive coping strategies but unassociated with adaptive coping strategies.

Conclusion: The findings point to the utility of increasing farm stress self-management self-efficacy to increase farmers' adaptive coping and reducing maladaptive beliefs about farm stress management to reduce maladaptive coping. Efforts to promote adaptive coping by increasing self-efficacy should also target maladaptive beliefs farmers hold toward stress management, because increasing self-efficacy may also increase the likelihood of maladaptive coping when maladaptive beliefs are present.

影响农民使用适应性和不良应对策略的因素。
目标:对于美国和世界各地的农民来说,慢性压力与各种负面结果有关,他们几乎经常面临内部(如家庭冲突)和外部(如天气)压力。研究表明,采用适应性应对策略和避免不适应的应对策略可以减轻农民的压力。然而,人们对如何预测他们的应对策略使用知之甚少。根据压力和应对的交易理论,本手稿试图确定与美国农民使用适应性和不适应性应对策略相关的因素。方法:美国农民(N = 135)完成了对理论上与应对策略选择相关的因素(对农场压力管理的不适应信念、农场压力管理自我效能感、年龄和性别)以及适应性和不适应性应对措施的调查评估。结果:农场压力管理自我效能感是适应性应对的显著正向预测因子,而对农场压力管理的不适应信念是不适应应对的显著正预测因子。关于农场压力管理的适应不良信念和农场压力管理自我效能感相互作用预测适应不良应对,因此,在较高的自我效能水平上,关于农场压力处理的适应不良信仰与适应不良应对之间的正相关关系显著。性别与应对策略无关,年龄与适应不良的应对策略呈负相关,但与适应应对策略无关。结论:研究结果表明,提高农场压力自我管理自我效能感有助于提高农民的适应性应对能力,减少对农场压力管理的不适应信念有助于减少不适应应对能力。通过提高自我效能来促进适应性应对的努力也应该针对农民对压力管理的不适应信念,因为当存在不适应信念时,提高自我效能也可能增加不适应应对的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Agromedicine
Journal of Agromedicine PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
20.80%
发文量
84
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Agromedicine: Practice, Policy, and Research publishes translational research, reports and editorials related to agricultural health, safety and medicine. The Journal of Agromedicine seeks to engage the global agricultural health and safety community including rural health care providers, agricultural health and safety practitioners, academic researchers, government agencies, policy makers, and others. The Journal of Agromedicine is committed to providing its readers with relevant, rigorously peer-reviewed, original articles. The journal welcomes high quality submissions as they relate to agricultural health and safety in the areas of: • Behavioral and Mental Health • Climate Change • Education/Training • Emerging Practices • Environmental Public Health • Epidemiology • Ergonomics • Injury Prevention • Occupational and Industrial Health • Pesticides • Policy • Safety Interventions and Evaluation • Technology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信