“…It was noted that more explicit measurement of the chronicity, as well as the level of change or threat posed by a given stressor, often improved the amount of variance explained in the outcomes, (e.g., G. W. Brown & Harris, 1978;B. S. Dohrenwend, Ashkenasy, Krasnoff, & Dohrenwend, 1978;Holmes & Rahe, 1967;Pearlin & Schooler, 1978;Wheaton, 1999), and it became clear that changes in environmental context over time made significant independent contributions to the outcomes of stressor exposure (e.g., Baltes & Baltes, 1990;Furstenberg, Brooks-Gunn, & Morgan, 1987;Hobfoll, Johnson, Ennis, & Jackson, 2003), Holahan, Moos, Holahan, & Cronkite, 1999;Lazarus, 1993aLazarus, , 1999Masten et al, 1988;Rutter, 1979;Sameroff, Seifer, Barocas, Zax, & Greenspan, 1987). Importantly, individual differences in cognitive and emotional responses to both stressor and context were found to be key factors in determining outcomes (e.g., anticipation, appraisal, coping, learning, and other types of information processing; Foa & Kozak, 1986;Hobfoll, 1989;Holahan, Moos, Holahan, & Cronkite, 2000;Ironson et al, 2000;Lazarus, 1991;Siegal & Allan, 1998;Sterling & Eyer, 1988;Stone, 1995;Toates, 1995;Tolin & Foa, 2002;Wheaton, 1985).…”