Unlocking the Black Box: A Multilevel Analysis of Preadolescent Children’s Coping

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This random assignment experimental study examined the intersection of children’s coping and physiologic stress reactivity and recovery patterns in a sample of preadolescent boys and girls. METHOD: A sample of 82 fourth and fifth grade (Mage = 10.59 years old) child-parent dyads participated in the present study. Children participated in the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST-C) and were randomly assigned to one of two post-TSST-C experimental coping conditions; behavioral distraction and cognitive avoidance. Children’s characteristic ways of coping were examined as moderators of the effect of experimental coping condition on cortisol reactivity and recovery patterns. RESULTS: Multi-level modeling analyses indicated that children’s characteristic coping and experimental coping condition interacted to predict differential cortisol recovery patterns. Children who characteristically engaged in primary control engagement coping strategies were able to more quickly down-regulate salivary cortisol when primed to distract themselves than when primed to avoid and vice versa. The opposite pattern was true for characteristic disengagement coping in the context of coping condition, suggesting that regulatory fit between children’s characteristic ways of coping and cues from their coping environment may lead to more and less adaptive physiologic recovery profiles. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides some of the first evidence that coping “gets under the skin” and that children’s characteristic ways of coping may constrain or enhance a child’s ability to make use of environmental coping resources.

What constitutes effective coping and efficient physiologic regulation following psychosocial stress depends on involuntary stress responses

“…Further, primed coping strategies traditionally thought to be universally adaptive (e.g., distraction) appear to be effective in managing stress physiology, but only for some children and under certain conditions. We suggest that future studies consider the notable possibility of regulatory fit in order to best understand how match between child-level characteristics and coping strategies influence children’s physiologic stress response profiles (Wadsworth et al, 2016). This knowledge is critical to identifying factors which may influence the efficacy of coping-based interventions (Compas et al, 1999).…”

“…As noted by Wadsworth et al (2016), the recovery phase of the stress response appears to be particularly well-suited for demonstrating the contribution of ISRs and their interaction with coping on cortisol and sAA responses to acute psychosocial stress. According to RTS theory (Connor-Smith et al, 2000), effortful coping takes place during the recovery period and influences the speed and efficiency of physiologic-down regulation.…”

“…A plausible explanation, which draws on our assessment of characteristic ISRs as opposed to in-vivo ISRs, is that avoidance may have provided a better regulatory fit for this subgroup of children (Wadsworth et al, 2016). Compas and colleagues (1999) argued two points which are germane to this supposition.…”

“…By definition, protracted recovery periods expose the body to elevated stress hormone levels for longer periods of time as the return to pre-stressor baseline levels is much slower. Children’s effortful coping manifests in the recovery period following exposure to an acute stressor and influences the efficiency with which stress hormones return toward pre-stressor baseline levels (Wadsworth et al, 2016). Thus, the recovery period following peak stress activity seems ideal for examining whether ISRs impede efficient cortisol and sAA recovery.…”

“…Immediately following the TSST-C, children were experimentally primed with either behavioral distraction or cognitive avoidance coping. Distraction is believed to combat stress’ damaging effects by helping children consciously reengage their attention to productive or soothing activities while avoidance is thought to exacerbate these effects by inadvertently focusing attention to the source of stress (Wadsworth et al, 2016). Though not the explicit focus of the current study, we anticipated that children primed to distract themselves would demonstrate more efficient physiologic recovery patterning relative to those primed to avoidance.…”