In a longitudinal community survey of 291 adults, we explored the relation between coping strategies and psychological symptoms. Respondents completed the revised Ways of Coping Scale (Folkman & Lazarus, 1985) for a self-named stressful episode. Factor analysis produced eight coping factors: three problem focused, four emotion focused, and one (support mobilization) that contained elements of both. Multiple regression analyses indicated bidirectionality in the relation between coping and psychological symptoms. Those in poorer mental health and under greater stress used less adaptive coping strategies, such as escapism, but coping efforts still affected mental health independent of prior symptom levels and degree of stress. We compared main versus interactive effects models of stress buffering. Main effects were confined primarily to the emotion-focused coping scales and showed little or negative impacts of coping on mental health; interactive effects, though small, were found with the problem-focused scales. The direction of the relation between problem-focused scales and symptoms may depend in part on perceived efficacy, or how the respondent thought he or she handled the problem. Implications for the measurement of adaptive coping mechanisms and their contextual appropriateness are discussed.

Chronic diseases carry important psychological and social consequences that demand significant psychological adjustment. The literature is providing increasingly nuanced conceptualizations of adjustment, demonstrating that the experience of chronic disease necessitates adaptation in multiple life domains. Heterogeneity in adjustment is apparent between individuals and across the course of the disease trajectory. Focusing on cancer, cardiovascular disease, and rheumatic diseases, we review longitudinal investigations of distal (socioeconomic variables, culture/ethnicity, and gender-related processes) and proximal (interpersonal relationships, personality attributes, cognitive appraisals, and coping processes) risk and protective factors for adjustment across time. We observe that the past decade has seen a surge in research that is longitudinal in design, involves adequately characterized samples of sufficient size, and includes statistical control for initial values on dependent variables. A progressively convincing characterization of risk and protective factors for favorable adjustment to chronic illness has emerged. We identify critical issues for future research.

This article introduces the concept of social constraints on disclosure, puts it in a theoretical framework, and examines how it can affect adjustment to major life stressors using the exemplar of cancer. Cancer is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. It is often life threatening, disfiguring, and unpredictable; hence, it can undermine people's basic and often positive beliefs and expectations about themselves, their future, and social relationships. For many people with cancer, it is important to come to terms psychologically with the illness -to make sense of or somehow accept the reality of it. People often do this by thinking about different aspects of the disease and its implications for their life, but also through socially processing, or talking about, their cancer-related thoughts, feelings, and concerns with others. When people experience social constraints on their disclosure of cancer-related thoughts and feelings, it can adversely affect how they think and talk about their illness, their coping behaviors, and psychological adjustment. In addition to discussing mechanisms and consequences of social constraints on disclosure, we discuss some of its determinants and future research directions.You seldom listen to me, and when you do you don't hear, and when you do hear you hear wrong, and even when you hear right you change it so fast that it's never the same.-Marjorie Kellogg, 1922Kellogg, -2005 Whenever we are compelled by others to regulate, restrict, or modify our thoughts, actions, or feelings, we are experiencing social constraints. From a sociological perspective, social constraints are objective, external circumstances, such as others' manner of acting, thinking, and feeling, which shape an individual's manner of acting, thinking, and feeling (Durkheim, 1982). Social constraints can be direct and coercive, as when police carry out laws through force, or indirect, as when individuals are shunned by neighbors for dressing or speaking in a particular way. This paper adopts 314 Social Constraints and Cancer a more social-psychological perspective on social constraints. According to this perspective, social constraints are the product of social facts -the actions, thoughts, and feelings of others -and individuals' psychological construal of those facts. Within the field of health psychology, the construct of social constraints is relatively new but is beginning to receive more attention as a predictor of stress, coping, and adjustment processes. This article examines social constraints on disclosure in the context of one major life stressor where it has been studied a good deal: coping with cancer. It is quite common for people to want to disclose thoughts and feelings related to cancer (Davison, Pennebaker, & Dickerson, 2000). If emotional disclosure is not possible or somehow discouraged, how does this influence coping, cognitive processing, and emotional reactions to cancer? Because cancer can be life threatening, disabling, and disfiguring, cancer survivors can experience difficulti...

Objective Couples facing metastatic breast cancer (MBC) must learn to cope with stressors that can affect both partners' quality of life as well as the quality of their relationship. Common dyadic coping involves taking a “we” approach, whereby partners work together to maintain their relationship while jointly managing their shared stress. This study prospectively evaluated whether common dyadic coping was associated with less cancer-related distress and greater dyadic adjustment for female MBC patients and their male partners. Design Couples (N = 191) completed surveys at the start of treatment for MBC (baseline), and 3 and 6 months later. Main Outcome Measures Cancer-related distress was assessed with the Impact of Events Scale; dyadic adjustment was assessed using the short-form of the Dyadic Adjustment Scale. Results Multilevel models using the couple as the unit of analysis showed that the effects of common positive dyadic coping on cancer-related distress significantly differed for patients and their partners. Whereas partners experienced slightly lower levels of distress, patients experienced slightly higher levels of distress. Although patients and partners who used more common negative dyadic coping experienced significantly greater distress at all times, the association was stronger for patients. Finally, using more common positive dyadic coping and less common negative dyadic coping was mutually beneficial for patients and partners in terms of greater dyadic adjustment. Conclusion Our findings underscore the importance of couples working together to manage the stress associated with MBC. Future research may benefit from greater focus on the interactions between patients and their partners to address ways that couples can adaptively cope together.