What Can We Learn from Exploring Cognitive Appraisal, Coping Styles and Perceived Stress in UK Undergraduate Dissertation Students? Max Korbmacher & Lynn Wright
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
What can we learn from exploring cognitive appraisal, coping styles and perceived stress in UK undergraduate dissertation students? Max Korbmacher & Lynn Wright Undergraduate dissertation students’ cognitive appraisal, coping styles and perceived stress were examined at three time points during their undergraduate dissertation projects (UDP), observing whether cognitive appraisal and coping styles predicted perceived stress and their temporal changes. Sixty-four dissertation students completed the Perceived Stress Scale, an adapted Cognitive Appraisal of Health Scale, the Brief COPE and explorative open-ended questions. Linear Regression models for each time-point showed coping styles and cognitive appraisal predicted perceived stress, but single coping styles and primary appraisal harm/loss predicted stress levels inconsistently over time. Analyses indicated significant effects of time-point on primary appraisals benign/irrelevance, harm/loss and challenge but none for secondary appraisal, coping styles or perceived stress. Content Analysis showed perceived stressors and coping styles to be a function of the UDP’s stages and their tasks and challenges. Implications and recommendations for students and supervisors are discussed. Keywords: Coping styles, cognitive appraisal, perceived stress, undergraduate dissertation project, undergraduate students. Introduction KEY component of a British Psycho- stress, such as cognitive appraisal and coping logical Society accredited degree styles. A is the requirement to conduct and Cognitive appraisal (CA) describes individ- write a dissertation – a research project uals’ interpretations and responses to stress where the student demonstrates academic in two steps: primary and secondary appraisal knowledge and skills. Research suggests (Devonport & Lane, 2006). Primary appraisal that many students find writing a disserta- (PA) is an individual’s assessment of a situa- tion stressful (Collins & Onwuegbuzie, 2003; tion’s relevance or irrelevance to their well- Devonport & Lane, 2006; Lane et al., 2004). being and secondary appraisal (SA) of their Students’ increased stress levels can lead to own ability to cope with the situation and its a variety of negative emotional, academic stressors (Lazarus, 1966). CA is connected to and health outcomes (Tosevski et al., 2010), both individual and environmental factors such as lower productivity and emotional such as demands, limitations, and opportuni- wellbeing (Russell-Pinson & Harris, 2017), ties (Devonport & Lane, 2006). The process of altered academic success (Krnjajić, 2006) or stress interpretation and coping is non-linear mental health problems (Mirbaha-Hashemi as different outcomes of appraisal and coping & Seward, 2010), for example, expressed in processes may re-initiate previous processes anxiety or depression symptoms (Crockett (Carver et al., 1989). A stressor interpreted et al., 2007). Besides university affordances, as unimportant or not dangerous to well- there are various internal and external being needs no further assessment, however, factors influencing individual perceptions of a stressor thought to challenge wellbeing will 48 Psychology Teaching Review Vol. 26 No. 1, 2020 UK dissertation students’ cognitive appraisal, coping styles and stress require coping mechanisms (Lazarus, 1966). tive CS’s, have been suggested; with behav- If individuals feel that insufficient resources ioural disengagement, substance use, denial are available to cope, stressor effects occur and self-blame being maladaptive, and posi- (Cohen et al., 1983). Accordingly, not the tive reframing, seeking emotional or instru- objective event itself, but both the objective mental support, active coping being adaptive event and the subjective, cognitively mediated CS’s (Carver et al., 1989). emotional response to the event, characterise Recent developments of the transac- the event as a whole (Cohen et al., 1983). tional model (e.g. Carver et al., 1989) Hence, CA is a useful and repeatedly used incorporate additional concepts such as tool to observe university students’ experi- self-regulation and motivation adding the ences of stressful situations (e.g. Devonport & notion of coping being goal-focused (Carver Lane, 2006; Hojat et al., 2003). & Scheier, 1981; Rasmussen et al., 2006). In Moreover, both individual and environ- contrast, the Cognitive Activation Theory of mental factors can influence individuals’ Stress (CATS) by Ursin and Erikson (2010) perceptions of the relevance of the situation, is a cognitive and psychobiological theory own stress levels and coping opportunities based on human and animal research and (Devonport & Lane, 2006). Examples of indi- describes how stress-stimuli are cognitively vidual factors are previous CA (O’Connor et processed and lead to a stress-response. al., 2010), bereavement (Cohen et al., 1983) Stress-responses can be brief and anabolic and belief and religious concepts (Tong & (train) or sustained and catabolic (strain), Teo, 2018). Examples of influential social and generally describe activation in the and environmental factors are given oppor- form of increased sympathetic activation as tunities/restrictions (Devonport & Lane, well as cortisol and adrenaline levels. The 2006), unemployment, and high-level noise- stress response, as well as stimulus expec- exposure (Cohen et al., 1983). These can tancy and response outcome expectancy can influence stress in both a positive or nega- influence how the load of further stress- tive way (Kożusznik et al., 2018). Accord- stimuli is perceived (Ursin & Erikson, ingly, CA seems to be a direct predictor of 2010). Train stress-responses entrain coping stress response (Harvey et al., 2010) and vice mechanisms/strategies, and strain stress- versa, different stressors can lead to varying responses learned helplessness and hope- interpretations of situations and appraisals lessness, respectively (Ursin & Erikson, (Lazarus, 1966). 2004). CATS offers a broader account of After assessing a danger to own well- stress-stimuli processing than Folkman and being in a situation (primary appraisal) Lazarus’ (1980) stress model, as, besides and resources available to deal with the coping, other forms of learning are included threat (secondary appraisal), coping strate- and linked to physiological response. Expe- gies are applied, influenced by situational riencing stress-responses over extended and individual-dependent psychosocial and periods can lead to lowered ability to focus environmental factors (Carver et al., 1989). and immune function, depressive symptoms Folkman and Lazarus (1980) generally and cardiovascular disease (Ursin & Erikson, distinguish between two main coping styles 2007). Thus, students have either positive or (CS): emotion-focused and problem-focused negative expectations about tasks they are coping. Emotion-focused coping directs exposed to, as well as the outcomes. Nega- emotional distress experienced in a situa- tive expectations about the undergraduate tion, and problem-focused coping fixates dissertation project (UDP) or parts of it, on problem-solving directed towards doing a one-year project, can lead to prolonged something to modify the stress’s source physiological activation and hence negative (Carver et al., 1989). However, further health outcomes. distinctions between adaptive and maladap- Psychology Teaching Review Vol. 26 No. 1, 2020 49 Max Korbmacher & Lynn Wright In contrast to transactional models, in Generally, CA (e.g. Devonport & Lane, CATS, coping is defined generally as the 2006) and CS’s (e.g. Bolger & Sarason, 1990; expectation to be able to handle the situ- Park et al., 2003) have been found to influ- ation, or positive outcome expectancy. ence students’ wellbeing and mental health CATS, however, does not focus on speci- (Devonport & Lane, 2006). Covariates, most fying different coping behaviours or styles importantly time, have been found to influ- as Folkman and Lazarus do (1980). While ence perceived stress levels, CA and CS’s Carver and colleagues (1989) argue for a (Carver et al., 1989; Devonport & Lane, good/bad coping style dichotomy, stress- 2006). CS’s might change over time due to responses (coping and learned helplessness their relationship with stress levels (e.g. in or hopelessness) in CATS are defined as nursing students: Bodys-Cupak et al., 2018), adaptive processes. and controlling for long-term outcomes and CA and coping are learned processes, individual differences requires repeated closely connected with personality (Tosevski measures testing. Devonport and Lane et al., 2010), and influenced by various (2006) examined CS and CA with UDP sports environmental factors, such as stress (Wads- students and found no significant changes worth, 2015), social environment and sociali- over time. Instead, their study showed fluc- sation (Ptacek et al., 1994). When students’ tuations of perceived stress as well as loss stress-coping strategies are maladaptive, appraisal, a type of primary appraisal (PA) academic performance can be impeded measuring individuals’ interpretation of a (Al-Dubai et al., 2011; Weiner & Carton, stimulus to be a possible threat leading to 2012) or cause increased perceived stress loss. To our knowledge, no other research levels (Palmer & Rodger, 2009). Wang and has investigated stress levels or CS’s in UK Miao (2009) found a correlation between dissertation students. mature CS’s and positive mental health in Furthermore, there appears to be a rela- medical students and problem solving to be tionship between CA