The results from the study demonstrated the importance of coping factors in work-stress research, in accordance with the multi-factorial premise of transactional stress models. It is argued that multi-factor research is needed to help develop effective organizational interventions.

Well-being at work has been shown to be influenced by job characteristics and individual differences in coping styles. This study investigated the relationships between job demands, control, social support, efforts, rewards, coping, and attributional style in predicting anxiety, depression, and job satisfaction in a sample of 307 university employees from the UK. Results were compared to those from a sample of 120 members of the general population. Workplace demands, intrinsic and extrinsic effort, and negative coping and attributional behaviors were associated with high levels of depression and anxiety and low job satisfaction in university employees. Rewards, social support, job control, and positive coping and attributional behaviors were associated with lower levels of depression and anxiety and high job satisfaction. The study adds to the growing research on university samples by showing that a transactional approach should be adopted. This has implications for interventions and suggests that rather than just trying to change job characteristics one should identify at-risk individuals in this population and help them adopt appropriate positive coping styles.

Research has shown that university staff report high levels of stress. Most of this research has used questionnaires and the aim of the present study was to develop the area using interview data. The mixed responses given about the definition of stress reflect the definitional debates in psychology as whether "stress" is the cause of problems, or if it is the response. All of the participants claimed to either to have, or were currently experiencing stress, which illustrates how widespread stress at work can be. The wide range of stressors described shows the complexity and number of stressful situations that employees in academic employment can be faced with. Many of the consequences of stress at work described by participants related to anxiety and other symptoms of worry. Trouble sleeping was a common problem, as were issues relating to taking work worries home. There were various suggestions made about how to help avert or deal with stress in the workplace, and most of these centred around communication and better training and selection of management. Several participants believed that the university should be treated more like a business, with professional managers advised by professors. Nearly all of the participants were unsatisfied with the current method of selecting management on the basis of academic merit. The use and results of the interview methods illustrate that while questionnaire methods are typically more general and are thus applicable to a wider range of different populations, qualitative studies can give an extra dimension to results, and can provide key information about stressors and outcomes that questionnaires based on traditional stress models cannot. Indeed using interviews to guide the use of questionnaire selection, which could then be analysed in line with the structure of the DemandsResources-Individual Effects (DRIVE) framework, could be an important direction in future research on specific populations. Keywords: university staff; stress; interviews; demands; resources; coping; individual differences; DRIVE model STRESS IN UNIVERSITY STAFFResearch suggests that stress levels in universities are high (Abouserie, 1996;Fisher, 1994;Gillespie et al, 2001;Kinman, 2001Kinman, , 2008 Kinman and Court, 210;Singh and Bush, 1998;Tytherleigh et al., 2005;Winefield and Jarrett, 2001). Mark and Smith (2012) investigated this issue using the Demands-Resources-Individual effects (DRIVE) model (Mark, 2006;Mark and Smith, 2008; Mark and Smith, 2012;Smith et al., 2009). Workplace demands, high intrinsic and extrinsic effort, negative coping and attributional style were associated with high levels of depression and anxiety in university staff. Williams et al. (2017) extended this research by including positive outcomes. Their results showed that negative outcomes (stress; anxiety and

Background: The first aim of this study was to analyse the structure of coping and to develop a measuring instrument to be used in future work. A second aim was to examine associations between coping scores and negative outcomes (anxiety, depression, fatigue, cognitive difficulties and somatic symptoms). Finally, gender differences in coping with workplace events were examined, as were the relationships between gender and subjective health outcomes. Methodology: A survey of a sample of 240 adults from the South Wales area was conducted at one-time point only. The questionnaire included a factor analysed version of the Ways of Coping Checklist (WCCL) as well as scales measuring anxiety, depression, fatigue, cognitive difficulties and somatic symptoms. Results: Results showed that negative coping styles significantly predicted negative health outcomes, and positive coping styles predicted fewer negative outcomes. No significant differences were found for health outcomes between men and women, but women were significantly more likely to use self-blame and wishful thinking coping. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that coping styles are associated with wellbeing outcomes.