Coping and Copers: What It Is to Cope, Personalities, and Effective and Non-Effective Coping Strategies

2066 WordsOct 12, 20129 Pages
Coping and Copers: What it is to Cope, Personalities, and Effective and Non-effective Coping Strategies Kerry Williams Psychology of Stress The Open Polytechnic of New Zealand Coping and Copers: What it is to Cope, Personalities and Effective and Non-effective Coping Strategies This essay discusses coping, a complex process exercised by people to suppress, change, or eliminate stress or threat. This essay also discusses copers, that is, people who exhibit certain personality characteristics, known as distress resistant personality patterns, which can significantly influence whether they stay healthy or become ill. Also covered are coping strategies, -strategies people draw upon to solve life’s stressors, some…show more content…
Optimism is another trait or attribute displayed by Type Bs, Cs, and hardy personalities (see below). Optimists are more inclined to appraise situations as challenging, whereas Type A personalities will appraise the same situation as a threat. Optimists tend to focus on what they can do to change or improve a stressful situation, rather than what they are unable to do. They are content in what they do accomplish, and do not focus on their failures (Schafer, 2000; Morris & Maisto, 2005). The Type C personality is formed by a number of attributes drawn from Type A and B personalities (Schafer, 2000). Individuals with the Type C personality encounter challenges head-on with success and vitality. Several qualities exhibited by Type Cs include their inspiring self, optimism, impulsive nature, and their vigilant focus (Schafer, 2000). The Type C model, developed by Robert and Marilyn Kriegel (1990, as cited in Schafer, 2000), categorises three patterns; challenge, confidence, and control, which closely resemble the three Cs of the hardy characteristic discussed below. Hardiness/resilience is a personality characteristic originally identified by Suzanne Kobasa (1979) and redefined in further studies by Kobasa, Maddi, and Kahn (1982), and many others, as cited in (Schafer, 2000; Morris & Maisto, 2005). It was established in these studies, that participants who displayed the
Open Document