Advertisement

Coping as a Moderator and Mediator between Stress at Work and Psychosomatic Complaints

  • Michael Frese
Part of the The Plenum Series on Stress and Coping book series (SSSO)

Abstract

Coping has become a central variable in psychological stress research. The concepts of coping and defense have been introduced to explain phenomena that cannot be explained by a simple stress—strain model. Some people react strongly to minor stressors, whereas others do not react even to major stressors. There are two ways to explain this. Coping or defense may be either a mediator or a moderator. (For ease of presentation, I shall use the term coping to stand for both coping and defense in the following presentation.) This distinction, between moderator and mediator, has rarely been made in the literature:
  1. 1.

    Coping serves as a mediator when it is related to both the stressors and the stress reaction or, more specifically, when it links the stressors to the stress reaction. The causal impact of stressors on the stress reaction works via coping (see Figure 1). Theoretically, this may mean that the stressor situation influences a certain type of coping response that, in turn, leads to psychological health or dysfunctioning. More technically, this can be examined with a partial correlation procedure (Simon, 1954).

     
  2. 2.

    Coping can function as a moderator when the relationship between stressors and stress reaction is dependent on whether a person is a “good” or a “bad” coper (or defender).

     

Keywords

Coping Strategy Psychological Stress Positive Outlook Demand Characteristic Daily Hassle 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bamberg, E. (1986). Arbeit und Freizeit: Eine empirische Untersuchung zum Zusammenhang zwischen Stress am Arbeitsplatz, Freizeit und Familie [Work and leisure time: Empirical research on the relationship between stress at work, leisure time, and family]. Weinheim: Beltz.Google Scholar
  2. Coyne, J. C., Aldwin, C., & Lazarus, R. S. (1981). Depression and coping in stressful episodes. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 90, 439–447.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. DeLongis, A., Coyne, J. C., Dakof, G., Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1982). Relationships of daily hassles, uplifts and major life events to health status. Health Psychology, 1, 119–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fahrenberg, J. (1975). Die Freiburger Beschwerdeliste FBL [The Freiburg complaint list FBL]. Zeitschrift für Klinische Psychologie, 4, 79–100.Google Scholar
  5. Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1980). An analysis of coping in a middle-aged community sample. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 21, 219–239.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Frese, M. (1982). Occupational socialization and psychological development: An underemphasized research perspective in industrial psychology. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 55, 209–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Frese, M. (1984). Job transitions, occupational socialization, and strain. In V. Allen & E.v.d. Vliert (Eds.), Role transitions (pp. 239–252). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  8. Frese, M. (1985). Stress at work and psychosomatic complaints: A causal interpretation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 314–328.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Frese, M., & Sabini, J. (Eds.) (1985). Goal oriented behavior: The concept of action in psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  10. Frese, M. (in press). Alleviating depression in the unemployed: On the effects of adequate financial support, hope and early retirement. Social Science and Medicine. Google Scholar
  11. Freud, A. (1978). Das Ich und die Abwehrmechanismen [The ego and the defense mechanisms]. München: Kindler.Google Scholar
  12. Gardell, B., & Johansson, G. (Eds.) (1981). Working life: A social science contribution to work reform. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  13. Greif, S., Bamberg, E., Dunckel, H., Frese, M., Mohr, G., Rueckert, D., Rummel, M., Semmer, N., & Zapf, D. (1983). Abschlussbericht des Forschungsprojekts: “Psychischer Stress am ArbeitsplatzHemmende und fördernde Bedingungen für humanere Arbeitsplaetze” [Final report of the research project “Psychological stress at work—factors promoting and impeding humane working conditions”]. Universität, Osnabrueck.Google Scholar
  14. Haan, N. (1977). Coping and defending: Processes of self-environment organization. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  15. Kenny, D. A. (1979). Correlation and causation. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  16. Lazarus, R. S. (1968). Psychological stress and the coping process. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  17. Lazarus, R. S. (1982). The denial of stress. In S. Breznitz (Ed.), Denial of stress. New York: International University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Mohr, G. (1986). Die Erfassung psychischer Betindenensbeeinträchtigungen bei Industriearbeitern [Measuring psychological well-being in blue-collar workers]. Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
  19. Orne, M. T. (1962). On the social psychology of the psychological experiment: With particular reference to demand characteristics and their implications. American Psychologist, 17, 776–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pearlin, L. I., & Schooler, C. (1978). The structure of coping. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 19, 2–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pelz, D. C., & Andrews, F. M. (1964). Detecting causal priorities in panel study data, American Sociological Review, 29, 836–848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rogosa, D. (1980). A critique of cross-lagged correlation. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 245–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Schönpflug, W. (1985). Goal directed behavior as a source of stress: Psychological origins and consequences of inefficiency. In M. Frese & J. Sabini (Eds.), Goal directed behavior: The concept of action in psychology (pp. 172–188). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  24. Semmer, N. (1982). Stress at work, stress in private life and psychosocial stress. In W. Bachmann, & I. Udris, (Eds.), Mental load and stress in activity: European approaches (pp. 42–52). Berlin (DDR): Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften, and Amsterdam & New York: Elsevier-North Holland.Google Scholar
  25. Semmer, N. (1984). Stressbezogene Tätigkeitsanalyse: Psychologische Untersuchungen zur Analyse von Stress am Arbeitsplatz [Stress-oriented analysis of work: Psychological studies on the analysis of stress at work]. Weinheim: Beltz.Google Scholar
  26. Simon, H. A. (1954). Spurious correlation: A causal interpretation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 49, 467–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Vaillant, G. E. (1977). Adaptation to life. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  28. Zapf, D., Bamberg, E., Dunckel, H., Frese, M., Greif, S., Mohr, G., Rueckert, D., Sc Semmer, N. (1983). Dokumentation der Skalen des Forschungsprojekts “Psychischer Stress am ArbeitsplatzHemmende und fordernde Bedingungen für humanere Arbeitsplaetze” [Scale documentation of the research project “Psychological stress at work—factors promoting and impeding humane working conditions”]. (Available from D. Zapf, Institut für Psychologie, Freie Universität Berlin, Habelschwerdter Allee 45, 1000 Berlin 33, Federal Republic of Germany).Google Scholar
  29. Zedeck, S. (1971). Problems with the use of “moderator” variables. Psychological Bulletin, 76, 295–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Frese
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für PsychologieUniversität MünchenMünchen 22Federal Republic of Germany

Personalised recommendations