{"title":"Looking back and moving forward: dimensions of coping flexibility divergently predict long-term bereavement outcomes.","authors":"Sandy H Huang, Jeffrey L Birk, George A Bonanno","doi":"10.1080/10615806.2022.2099545","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Bereavement is a serious public health concern. Some people suffer prolonged and debilitating functional impairment after the death of a loved one. Evidence suggests that flexibility in coping approaches predicts resilience after stressful life events, but its long-term effects after the unique experience of bereavement are unknown. Which strategies of coping flexibility predict better-or worse-adjustment over time for bereaved people and at what times?</p><p><strong>Design and methods: </strong>The present study used path analyses to investigate longitudinal effects of forward-focus and loss-focus coping strategies on symptoms of persistent complex bereavement disorder (PCBD), depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder in a spousally bereaved adult sample (<i>N</i> = 248) at three time-points after the loss (∼3 months, ∼14 months, and ∼25 months).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forward-focus coping demonstrated adaptive utility overall, with sooner effects on PCBD than on depression. By contrast, loss-focus coping demonstrated a delayed-onset, maladaptive pattern.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings contribute to the coping flexibility literature by suggesting that the adaptiveness or maladaptiveness of different coping strategies may depend on the context that requires coping. In particular, forward-focus coping may be substantially more advantageous than loss-focus coping in the context of bereavement. Implications, limitations, and future research directions are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":51415,"journal":{"name":"Anxiety Stress and Coping","volume":"36 3","pages":"275-290"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9849482/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anxiety Stress and Coping","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2022.2099545","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/7/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and objectives: Bereavement is a serious public health concern. Some people suffer prolonged and debilitating functional impairment after the death of a loved one. Evidence suggests that flexibility in coping approaches predicts resilience after stressful life events, but its long-term effects after the unique experience of bereavement are unknown. Which strategies of coping flexibility predict better-or worse-adjustment over time for bereaved people and at what times?
Design and methods: The present study used path analyses to investigate longitudinal effects of forward-focus and loss-focus coping strategies on symptoms of persistent complex bereavement disorder (PCBD), depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder in a spousally bereaved adult sample (N = 248) at three time-points after the loss (∼3 months, ∼14 months, and ∼25 months).
Results: Forward-focus coping demonstrated adaptive utility overall, with sooner effects on PCBD than on depression. By contrast, loss-focus coping demonstrated a delayed-onset, maladaptive pattern.
Conclusions: The findings contribute to the coping flexibility literature by suggesting that the adaptiveness or maladaptiveness of different coping strategies may depend on the context that requires coping. In particular, forward-focus coping may be substantially more advantageous than loss-focus coping in the context of bereavement. Implications, limitations, and future research directions are discussed.
期刊介绍:
This journal provides a forum for scientific, theoretically important, and clinically significant research reports and conceptual contributions. It deals with experimental and field studies on anxiety dimensions and stress and coping processes, but also with related topics such as the antecedents and consequences of stress and emotion. We also encourage submissions contributing to the understanding of the relationship between psychological and physiological processes, specific for stress and anxiety. Manuscripts should report novel findings that are of interest to an international readership. While the journal is open to a diversity of articles.