The role of hardiness in stress and illness: An exploration of the effect of negative affectivity and gender

Abstract

Past research into the effects of hardiness on stress and health has yielded inconsistent findings, possibly because of a failure to acknowledge the influence of variables such as negative affectivity and gender. This study examined the main, moderating and mediating effects of hardiness in a sample of 130 (50 male, 80 female) randomly selected university staff members. Controlling for negative affectivity, limited evidence was obtained for the direct effects of hardiness on stress and illness. Kobasa's (1979) model that hardiness buffers the effects of stress on illness was supported for males, but not for females. The hypothesis that approach and avoidance coping mediate the hardiness-illness relationship was not supported for either sex, although there was evidence that relative coping mediated this relationship in females. Collectively, the results point to a need to reconsider the conceptualization and measurement of hardiness.

Exploring Gender Equivalence and Bias in a Measure of Psychological Hardiness

“…Firstly, there are reasons to believe that the stereotypical coping patterns of men and women are not as clear cut as presented above (Tamres et al, 2002). And secondly, research have demonstrated gender differences even when no differences in coping were present (Klag & Bradley, 2004).…”

“…In later studies that have included female participants, inconsistent or equivocal results have been reported. Some have found that hardiness moderates the ill effects of stress on health for men, but not for women (Benishek & Lopez, 1997;Klag & Bradley, 2004;Shepperd & Kashani, 1991), while others have found similar effects for the two sexes (King, King, Fairbank, Keane, & Adams, 1998;Robitschek & Kashubeck, 1999;Rosen, Wright, Marlowe, Bartone, & Gifford, 1999).…”

“…It has been suggested that the coping strategies typically employed by men and women could account for some of the observed differences (Klag & Bradley, 2004;Williams, Wiebe, & Smith, 1992). More precisely, men stereotypically cope with stress by using problem-focused strategies, whereas women are believed to employ avoidance strategies to a larger degree (Tamres, Janicki, & Helgeson, 2002).…”

Psychological resilience: the impact of affectivity and coping on state anxiety and positive emotions during and after the Washington, DC sniper killings

“…More neuroticism has been associated with less hardiness (Klag & Bradley, 2004) and more avoidant coping (Bolger & Zuckerman, 1995), as well as greater psychological stress (Bolger & Schilling, 1991), physical illness (Sammallahti, Holi, Komulainen, & Aalberg, 1996), and mortality (Shipley, Weiss, Der, Taylor, & Deary, 2008). Given its broad and consistent impact on important health outcomes, neuroticism was used in the current research as a measure of affectivity.…”

Talking about mental health nursing: a qualitative analysis of nurses’ and service users’ accounts

“…Ouellette and DiPlacido (2001) suggest that developing hardiness is one method of promoting workers' coping strategies, as hardy individuals are reported to have a more optimistic view of the environment. Hardiness for nurses is indicated as a protective factor incorporating commitment, control and challenge that enables an individual to manage problematic situations (Klag & Bradley, 2004;Pengilly & Dowd, 2000). This controlling type of hardiness in this context is portrayed as an attribute, with Abdollahi, Abu Talib, Yaacob and Ismail (2014) describing hardiness as a mediator.…”