Coping Across the Transition to Adolescence

Abstract

The goal of this study was to examine various forms of coping across the transition to adolescence, with a focus on interindividual (correlational) consistency of coping and mean-level changes in coping. Adolescents’ emotional coping, problem solving, positive cognitive restructuring, avoidance, and support seeking in response to everyday stressors were assessed via a daily diary beginning when participants (N = 155) were approximately 9 years old and continued every 2 years for a total of four assessments. Most indices of coping demonstrated some interindividual consistency across time. Emotional coping and support-seeking coping declined over time, whereas positive cognitive restructuring and avoidance increased as adolescents aged. The discussion focuses on the implications of the findings and suggestions for advancing this line of inquiry.

Keywords

coping longitudinal latent growth curve modeling adolescent development

Children’s and adolescents’ coping responses to stressful events are critically important to their social functioning (Compas, Connor-Smith, Saltzman, Thomsen, & Wadsworth, 2001; Skinner & Zimmer-Gembeck, 2007). Despite an increase in interest on the topic of coping, there are few data on the interindividual consistency of coping or mean-level changes in coping, especially when considering relations beyond a single year. Additional knowledge on how adolescents respond to everyday stressors is critical given evidence that these responses have been related to key developmental outcomes such as externalizing problem, internalizing problems, social competence, and academic achievement (Compas et al., 2001; Kanner, Coyne, Schaefer, & Lazarus, 1981; Wagner, Compas, & Howell, 1988). In the present study, we utilized diary reports of coping to examine changes (or lack thereof) in coping across the transition to adolescence.

Historically, coping has been defined as “constantly changing cognitive and behavioral efforts to manage specific external and/or internal demands that are appraised as taxing or exceeding the resources of the person” (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984, p. 141). Based on this definition, coping has typically been classified as problem-focused or emotion-focused. Investigators have argued that this approach is limiting because responses to stress can fit into both categories (Ayers, Sandler, West, & Roosa, 1996; Connor-Smith, Compas, Wadsworth, Thomsen, & Saltzman, 2000).

In response to this limitation, Compas and colleagues (2001) conceptualized coping as “conscious volitional efforts to regulate emotion, cognition, behavior, physiology, and the environment in response to stressful events or circumstances” (p. 89) and argued for using a multidimensional approach to classify coping. With such an approach, Ayers et al. (1996) found that a four-factor model of coping—consisting of active coping, distraction, avoidance, and support seeking—best captured individuals’ responses to stress. Ayers et al. argued that active coping involves cognitive decision making, direct problem solving (i.e., behavioral efforts at managing or altering the problem causing the distress; Ayers et al., 1996), and positive cognitive restructuring, whereas distraction involves the release of emotions via exercise or relaxation and engaging in other activities to avoid thinking about the problem. Avoidance can be behavioral in nature (e.g., avoiding a stressful event) or more cognitive (e.g., inhibiting oneself from thinking about the stressor). Attempts to recruit other people to listen to the problem or to help solve the problem are classified as support seeking. Finally, emotional venting and crying are often classified as nonconstructive responses to stress or emotional coping (Eisenberg, Fabes, Nyman, Bernzweig, & Pinuelas, 1994; Sandstrom, 2004).

Developmental Issues in the Study of Coping

A consistent limitation noted in reviews of the coping literature is the lack of longitudinal research that addresses how coping develops across the life span (see Losoya, Eisenberg, & Fabes, 1998, for an exception; Skinner & Zimmer-Gembeck, 2007). Given the importance of children’s and adolescents’ coping to their externalizing problems, as well as depression and academic success, it is critical to address developmental issues such as interindividual consistency (sometimes referred to as rank-order consistency or correlational consistency) across time and mean-level change in coping that have been neglected (Compas et al., 2001; Smith et al., 2006; Wadsworth, Rieckmann, Benson, & Compas, 2004). Interindividual consistency refers to individual differences and reflects a person’s consistency in responding relative to others (e.g., is distraction at age 5 correlated with distraction at 7), whereas mean-level stability refers to change (or lack thereof) in the mean level of a variable across time (De Fruyt et al., 2006; Losoya et al., 1998). Delineation of both types of processes is necessary to develop a better understanding of the development of coping.

The Interindividual Consistency of Coping

Theorists tend to view individual differences in coping as relatively consistent across time. For example, some scholars view dispositional coping as a form of emotion regulation that has a temperamental basis (Compas et al., 2001; Eisenberg, Fabes, & Guthrie, 1997), and individual differences in temperamentally based regulation are fairly consistent over time (Rothbart & Bates, 2006). However, it generally is acknowledged that interindividual consistency in coping might be modest because of individual differences in the development of skills and abilities over time and in the contexts that different individuals encounter. For example, only modest interindividual consistency might be expected for avoidance, support seeking, and distraction because these methods of coping seem especially prone to fluctuations based on the type of stressor and might vary considerably as a function of development (e.g., avoidance and support seeking may be more normative and acceptable at young ages and older adolescents may have a greater capacity to use distracting cognitive techniques and cognitive techniques such as positive cognitive restructuring; Skinner & Zimmer-Gembeck, 2007). In contrast, one might expect relatively high interindividual consistency in direct problem solving (which should be useful and normative at most ages) and emotional coping.

Investigators have rarely examined interindividual consistency of coping across more than 1 year; however, in samples comprised of participants ranging in age from 9 to 14 years, there is some evidence of interindividual consistency for coping directed at children’s solving problems (e.g., active coping or engagement coping, Causey & Dubow, 1992; Compas, Malcarne, & Fondacaro, 1988; Sandler, Tein, Mehta, Wolchik, & Ayers, 2000). Researchers have also reported that avoidance and distraction exhibit interindividual consistency in short-term (e.g., less than 1 year) longitudinal studies involving participants ranging in age from 7 to 13 years (Causey & Dubow, 1993; Sandler et al., 2000; Sandler, Tein, & West, 1994). In one of the longest longitudinal studies of coping to date (Losoya et al., 1998), teachers reported on children’s coping when children were on average 5 years old and then again every 2 years for a total of four assessments. Instrumental coping, behavioral avoidance, and distraction demonstrated interindividual consistency over 6 years, whereas indices of support seeking generally were not correlated across time (Losoya et al., 1998).

Mean-Level Changes in Coping

In addition to changes associated with different contexts across years, there are a number of good reasons to expect changes in mean levels of coping across the transition to adolescence (Compas et al., 2001; Zimmer-Gembeck & Skinner, 2011). For example, Compas (1998) proposed that as children develop the skills necessary for cognitive abstraction, complex problem solving, and hypothetical thinking, they should be better able to use more cognitively based coping, which can include some types of distraction, avoidance, and active coping. In contrast, as children age and their ability to independently resolve stressors via distraction, avoidance, positive cognitive restructuring, or direct problem solving increases, children and adolescents may not need to rely on support seeking (especially from adults) as often. Likewise, the reliance on nonconstructive/hostile responses to stressors is likely to decline over time as adolescents rely on more socially appropriate strategies to resolve stressful situations (Tremblay, 2000).

In an integrative review of age-related changes in coping, Zimmer-Gembeck and Skinner (2011) found that the use of distraction often increased from age 5 to 14. There was clear evidence of age-related increases in problem solving throughout early childhood and into adolescence. They found too few studies to provide a clear conclusion on emotional coping, but there was evidence that support seeking declined throughout childhood (e.g., among 7- to 12-year-olds), although it was still utilized by older adolescents, and there is some evidence of an increase in support seeking during late adolescence and early adulthood. It is important to note, however, that many of the studies reviewed by Zimmer-Gembeck and Skinner had small sample sizes and less than 25% were longitudinal. Further, some of the longitudinal studies assessed how participants believed they would respond to stressors rather than how they actually coped with stressors.

The Present Study

In the present study, participants’ coping was assessed with regard to real-life, naturally occurring daily stressors. Using this approach, we sought to extend the literature in two ways. First, we tested whether coping demonstrated interindividual consistency over a much longer period of time than is usually considered. We expected significant interindividual consistency in problem solving and emotional coping; somewhat less interindividual consistency over time was expected for support seeking, avoidance, positive cognitive restructuring, and distraction. Second, we tested whether there were mean-level changes in coping. We expected participants to use more problem solving, positive cognitive restructuring, and distraction as they progressed into adolescence, and less emotional coping and support-seeking coping. We could not make predictions regarding the use of avoidance. Finally, unlike many studies, we assessed participants’ coping response to real-life, naturally occurring daily stressors.

Method

Participants in this study were part of a longitudinal study on children’s emotional and social adjustment (Eisenberg, Fabes, Guthrie, & Reiser, 2000). Participants were recruited via schools, newspaper ads, and flyers at after-school programs. Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained prior to data collection. All parents provided written consent (adolescents’ provided assent) prior to participating in the study. The original sample consisted of 199 children and their parents. Data from the initial assessment were not included because a different questionnaire was used to assess coping. The focus of the present study was on the participants who completed a daily diary 2, 4, 6, and 8 years after the initial assessment. These measurement occasions are referred to as Time 1 (T1), Time 2 (T2), Time 3 (T3), and Time 4 (T4). Participants were included in this study if they completed the diary measure at any time point.

Considering diaries from all four assessments, diary data were obtained from 155 children (82 girls and 73 boys). Ninety-three, 90, 120, and 101 participants completed the diary at T1, T2, T3, and T4, respectively. Completing the diary was an optional portion of the main study. Forty participants completed the diary at one assessment, 33 completed the diary on two assessments, 30 completed the diary on three assessments, and 52 completed the diary on all four assessments (see “Analytic Strategy” section of this article for our treatment of missing data).

Table 1 contains the demographic information for participants who completed the diary at the various assessments. There were approximately equal numbers of boys and girls at each assessment. At T1, participants’ mean age was 9.39 years (SD = 1.18). Participants were primarily from European American, working- and middle-class families.

Table 1.

Demographic Characteristics.

	T1	T2	T3	T4
Sex
Girls	48	51	61	57
Boys	45	39	59	44
Age	9.39 (1.18) 7.33-12.42	11.15 (1.08) 9.33-13.33	13.41 (1.10) 11.33-15.75	15.32 (1.14) 3.33-17.75
Ethnicity
Native American	1	1	3	2
African American	1	0	0	0
Hispanic	6	6	8	6
Asian	1	1	1	1
European American	79	77	101	85
Other	5	5	7	7
Income	2.88 (1.17)	3.48 (1.41)	3.82 (1.41)	4.33 (1.32)
Years of education: Mothers	14.90 (2.21)	4.08 (1.30)	4.22 (1.50)	4.54 (1.53)
Years of education: Fathers	15.44 (2.69)	4.34 (1.49)	4.31 (1.53)	4.64 (1.84)

Note. Data for sex reflect the number of participants in each cell. Data for age (in years), income, and mothers’ and fathers’ education are means and standard deviations; the latter in parentheses. Data for ethnicity reflect the number of participants. Income was coded categorically (1 = less than $20,000; 2 = $20,000 to $40,000; 3 = $40,000 to $60,000; 4 = $60,000 to $80,000; 5 = $80,000 to $100,000; 6 = more than $100,000). Mothers’ and fathers’ education was coded as continuous at T1, but categorically at T2 to T4 (1 = less than a high school diploma, 2 = high school diploma, 3 = some college, 4 = 2-year college degree, 5 = college degree, 6 = professional degree). T1 = Time 1; T2 = Time 2; T3 = Time 3; T4 = Time 4.

Participants who completed the diary at any measurement occasion were compared on demographic characteristics (i.e., race and sex of child [using chi-square tests] and age, family income, and mothers’ and fathers’ education [using t tests]) with adolescents who never completed the diary. There were no significant differences between these two groups on T1 mothers’ or fathers’ education, income, or age. Compared with those of other groups, African American, χ²(1) = 20.69, p < .01, and Hispanic, χ²(1) = 7.78, p < .01, participants were less likely to complete the diary than would be expected by chance, whereas European American participants were more likely to participate in the diary portion of the research, χ²(1) = 14.24, p < .01. Girls completed the diary at a higher rate than would be expected by chance compared with boys, χ²(1) = 4.86, p < .05. Further analyses compared those who completed the diary at only one assessment with those who completed the diary at multiple assessments. There were no significant differences between these two groups on any of the variables listed above.

Procedure

At each assessment, the adolescent participant and a parent (usually the mother) came to a university laboratory. The adolescent was asked to complete a daily diary that summarized the daily stressful events they encountered and the coping strategies used in response to the daily stressor. Adolescents were instructed to complete the diary before they went to bed and to consider only the events of the previous 24 hours. They were then given two diary packets (one for each week) and self-addressed stamped envelopes and told to mail the diaries back after they completed the packets. Adolescent participants were provided with a phone number of a contact person (who called the participant once a week) who could help to answer any questions. Participants were directed to complete the diary for 14 successive days. At T1 and T2, parents were asked to help their child fill out the survey, but to rely on the child to report their coping strategies. Because participants were older and had experience with the diary procedure at T3 and T4, the parent was instructed to help only if her assistance was required. Participants received a modest financial compensation for their efforts.

The average numbers of days the diary was completed at T1, T2, T3, and T4 were 12.65 (SD = 2.66; range 6 to 14), 13.17 (SD = 2.15; range 6 to 14), 12.72 (SD = 2.45; range 7 to 14), and 12.92 (SD = 2.52; range 7 to 14), respectively. At T1, 34% of the events were nonsocial, 27% involved children, and 39% involved adults. These percentages were 29%, 27%, and 44% at T2; 40%, 30%, and 30% at T3; and 39%, 29%, and 32% at T4.

Coping

In response to these events, participants endorsed the following items: cried, was very emotional about the problem, tried to ignore the problem or tried not to think about it, told myself there was not a problem, tried to stay away from the problem, asked someone to help solve the problem, talked to friends or family, took action to get the problem solved (referred to as problem solving in this article), tried to think about the problem in a positive way (referred to as positive cognitive restructuring), and distracted myself. All responses on the diary questionnaire were dichotomous (e.g., 0 = absent and 1 = present) and represent responses to actual stressful events. As a first step in the data reduction process, at each assessment, composites across all of the diary days were computed. For example, the average index for cried at T1 was computed by averaging the 14 daily responses of cried at T1. These composites were used in the subsequent data reduction analyses.

To further reduce the number of variables within each assessment period, we relied upon theory (Ayers et al., 1996; Connor-Smith et al., 2000; Skinner, Edge, Altman, & Sherwood, 2003), patterns of correlations, and a principal components analysis at each assessment. At each time point, we entered cried, was very emotional, tried to ignore the problem, told myself there was not a problem, tried to stay away from the problem, asked someone to help solve the problem, and talked to friends or family into a principal components analysis with a varimax rotation and specified three factors. In preliminary analyses, distraction was sometimes related to avoidance items. Because this pattern was inconsistent with theory (Ayers et al., 1996) and relations of avoidance and distraction to outcomes are different (Sandler et al., 1994), we do not consider distraction in further analyses. In addition, problem solving and positive cognitive restructuring, unlike in Ayers et al.’s (1996) data on active coping, did not correlate well or load together; thus, for conceptual and empirical reasons (there was only one item for each of these), they were not included in the final factor analyses and were treated as one-item constructs.

At each assessment, cried and was very emotional loaded on one component (loadings were greater than .82 at each assessment); tried to ignore the problem, told myself there was not a problem, tried to stay away from the problem loaded on a second component (loadings were greater than .51 at each assessment); and asked someone to help solve the problem, and talked to friends or family loaded on the third component (loadings were greater than .69 at each assessment). There were no cross-loadings greater than .48 and most were less than .20. With the exception of an eigenvalue equal to .81 at T3, all eigenvalues were greater than 1. Based on these results, crying and was very emotional were averaged to create an emotional coping composite (alphas were .81, .75, .79, and .75 at T1, T2, T3, and T4, respectively, when computed using data from each measure of coping across each of the 14 days). Tried to ignore the problem, told myself there was not a problem, and tried to stay away from the problem were averaged to form an avoidance composite (alphas were .59, .76, .87, and .87 at T1, T2, T3, and T4, respectively). Asked someone to help solve the problem, and talked to friends or family were averaged to form an index of support seeking (alphas were .80, .77, .80, and .76 at T1, T2, T3, and T4, respectively). Alphas were also computed across days for the single-item indices of problem solving and cognitive restructuring and were, at T1 to T4, .65, .60, .78, and .73 for the former and .51, .48, .75, and .79 for the latter.

Analytic Strategy

Prior to examining the main research questions, we present descriptive statistics for the main study variables (see Table 2). To investigate the interindividual consistency in coping, we present correlations among the coping variables. To investigate mean-level change in coping, we present results for the latent growth curve (LCG) models. Due to the presence of missing data, we used full information maximum likelihood (FIML) in MPlus 7.11 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998-2012) to compute the correlations and growth curve parameters for all 155 participants with coping data at one or more assessments.

Table 2.

Descriptive Statistics.

	T1		T2		T3		T4
	$\bar{X}$	SD	$\bar{X}$	SD	$\bar{X}$	SD	$\bar{X}$	SD
Emotional coping	0.30	0.19	0.17	0.13	0.08	0.11	0.09	0.12
Problem solving	0.29	0.19	0.25	0.19	0.28	0.23	0.30	0.21
PCG	0.11	0.12	0.11	0.12	0.15	0.18	0.13	0.18
Avoidance	0.11	0.08	0.11	0.10	0.22	0.17	0.18	0.16
Support seeking	0.30	0.18	0.28	0.19	0.14	0.14	0.14	0.14

Note. The n for the coping variables is 93, 90, 120, and 101 at T1, T2, T3, and T4, respectively. T1 = Time 1; T2 = Time 2; T3 = Time 3; T4 = Time 4; PCG = positive cognitive restructuring.

When individuals differ in the amount of time between assessments, using assessment number as an estimate of time results in biased parameter estimates (Mehta & West, 2000). Consequently, when estimating the growth curves, we allowed for individual assessment schedules based on participants’ age at each study visit using the TSCORES option in Mplus (Muthén & Muthén, 1998-2012). Fit statistics are not available when estimating models using the TSCORES option because the factor loadings are random effects. The relative fit of nested models can still be compared using a likelihood ratio test when using the TSCORES option (e.g., comparing a linear with quadratic model), and therefore, for each index of coping, we estimated simple unconditional growth models and increased model complexity by adding fixed or random effects until model fit could not be improved relative to the more parsimonious, nested model (Singer & Willett, 2003). Covariances among the latent variables in these models were freely estimated and model comparisons were made using likelihood ratio tests.

Results

Correlational Analyses

The df for each of the following correlations was 153. Sex (coded 0 = girls, 1 = boys) was negatively related to emotional coping at T2 (r = −.31, p < .01), T3 (r = −.32, p < .01), and T4 (r = −.50, p < .01); positive cognitive restructuring at T2 (r = −.23, p < .05) and T3 (r = −.18, p < .05); and support seeking at T3 (r = −.31, p < .01) and T4 (r = −.29, p < .01).

To test whether there was significant interindividual consistency in coping strategies, we estimated correlations across time for each type of coping (e.g., correlations between emotion coping at T1, T2, and T3, and T4). As shown in Table 3, five of the six correlations for emotional coping and problem solving were significant and positive, whereas only one correlation was significant for positive cognitive restructuring. Three of the six correlations were significant and positive for avoidance and for support seeking. When considering across 2 years rather than longer periods of time, all three correlations were significant for emotional coping and avoidance, and two of three correlations were significant for problem solving and for support seeking. There was little evidence of interindividual consistency for positive cognitive restructuring. We used Chen and Popovich’s (2002) approach to test whether the size of the interindividual consistency changed across adjacent assessments. For example, we tested whether the correlations between T1 and T2 differed significantly from the relations between T2 and T3. Likewise, we tested whether the relations between T2 and T3 were stronger than those between T3 and T4. The correlations between T1 and T2 were stronger than between T2 and T3 for each index of coping except for avoidance. When testing for differences between correlations at T2 and T3 and T3 and T4, stronger relations were found between T3 and T4 for problem solving and support seeking.¹

Table 3.

Interindividual Consistency of Coping.

	T1-T2	T1-T3	T1-T4	T2-T3	T2-T4	T3-T4
Emotional coping	.59**	.07	.27*	.30**	.27**	.34**
Problem solving	.52**	.25*	.41**	.16	.24*	.41**
PCG	.34**	−.11	.00	.08	.01	.17
Avoidance	.40**	.05	.10	.31**	.18	.35**
Support seeking	.52**	.01	.07	.12	.31**	.57**

Note. N = 155 for each correlation. T1 = Time 1; T2 = Time 2; T3 = Time 3; T4 = Time 4; PCG = positive cognitive restructuring.

p < .05. **p < .01.

Mean-Level Changes

When estimating mean-level changes in coping, we centered time at the mean age at T1 (9.39 years) and we rescaled the coping variables by multiplying by 10 to aid model convergence. We first estimated linear models for each index of coping. Next, we estimated quadratic models and compared the change in fit based on the difference in log likelihood values. Adding the fixed effect quadratic term resulted in a significant improvement in fit for the emotional coping and support-seeking models, χ²_change (1) = 48.91 and 7.05, ps < .01, respectively. Adding quadratic fixed effects for the other coping variables did not result in an improvement in fit and estimating the fixed and random effects for the quadratic term did not improve model fit for any model. In Table 4, we present parameter estimates from the quadratic model for emotional coping and support seeking and from the linear models for the other variables. As shown in Table 4, emotional coping and support seeking declined as children aged, but the rate of decline decreased over time (see Table 4 for the growth parameters and Figure 1 for the expected values for each type of coping at each assessment for a child at the sample mean for age). In contrast, there were mean-level increases in positive cognitive restructuring and avoidance. There was no significant mean-level change in problem solving. The variances were significant for the intercept for emotional coping and avoidance and for the slope of support seeking. None of the covariances between the intercept and slope was significant.^2,3

Table 4.

Summary of Growth Parameters From Unconditional Models.

	Intercept		Linear slope		Quadratic	Intercept-slope covariance
	$\bar{X}$	Variance	$\bar{X}$	Variance	$\bar{X}$	Intercept-slope covariance
Emotional coping	2.760**	.849*	−0.776**	.028	0.074**	−.108
Problem solving	2.600**	.939	0.065	.016	—	.035
PCG	1.035**	.171	0.077**	.001	—	−.007
Avoidance	1.101**	.317**	0.128**	.022	—	−.023
Support seeking	2.766**	.845	−0.402**	.056*	0.027*	−.099

Note. PCG = positive cognitive restructuring.

p < .05. **p < .01.

Figure 1.

Expected values from unconditional models of coping with daily stressors.

Discussion

Results from numerous studies document the importance of children’s and adolescents’ coping. Despite a large body of literature on coping, there are few studies examining whether coping demonstrates interindividual consistency and mean-level change as children transition to adolescence—a period of time that can be stressful and challenging as children adapt to rapidly changing physical, social, academic, and emotional stressors (Collins & Steinberg, 2006). In this study, we addressed these limitations within the context of a multiyear longitudinal study of participants’ responses to naturally occurring daily stressors. We documented significant interin-dividual consistency in coping as well as significant mean-level changes in emotional coping, positive cognitive restructuring, avoidance, and support seeking.

There was support for the hypothesis that coping would demonstrate interindividual consistency over 2 years and sometimes longer periods (with the exception of positive cognitive restructuring and avoidance). These findings offer partial support for the hypothesis that coping is a form of emotion regulation that is believed to be relatively consistent across time (Compas et al., 2001; Eisenberg et al., 1997). This consistency might be due to coping having a basis in temperament/personality, which is somewhat stable across time (Rothbart & Bates, 2006). Consistency in coping is desirable when the method of coping is associated with adaptive outcomes, but high consistency in emotional coping is concerning given its potential relation with measures of maladjustment. The number of significant correlations is noteworthy given that 2 to 6 years elapsed between assessments. It is important to consider the timing between assessments when forming conclusions, as the magnitude of relations is likely to decrease as the time between assessments increases.

We found clear evidence of mean-level changes in coping. For example, both avoidance and positive cognitive restructuring increased over time. Because two of the items for avoidance involved cognitive processes (e.g., “Tried to ignore the problem,” “Told myself there was not a problem”), the finding for avoidance is consistent with evidence that older children use coping methods that are geared toward changing their cognitive states more so than younger children (Altshuler & Ruble, 1989; Band & Weisz, 1988; Compas et al., 1988). The increased utilization of avoidance may also reflect children’s increasing understanding of internal states and their management (Saarni, Campos, Camras, & Witherington, 2006). Positive cognitive restructuring may increase as youths develop more strategies and competencies for managing their environments and their own behavior and perhaps more perceptions of efficacy at doing so. Additional longitudinal research is needed to determine whether the type of stressor (e.g., whether or not it is controllable) is associated with mean-level changes in coping.

Consistent with the longitudinal findings of Losoya et al. (1998), as children aged, their reliance on emotional coping declined (especially for girls), and the rate of decline slowed across time. The replacement of coping responses such as crying and emotional venting with efforts to solve the problem in more constructive ways may become easier as children gain experience managing stressful events, especially if they are able to successfully use more socially sanctioned methods (e.g., active coping, distraction, avoidance).

The finding that mean levels of support seeking decreased across time is consistent with cross-sectional (Bernzweig, Eisenberg, & Fabes, 1993) and longitudinal (Losoya et al., 1998) studies using different measures of coping. As adolescents develop the resources to independently manage daily stressors, they may no longer need to rely as heavily on others for assistance. Alternatively, as children get older, adults are less likely to intervene and likely hold expectations that adolescents manage stress themselves to a greater extent. Relative to younger children, adolescents also find themselves in situations that do not involve adults. This explanation is consistent with our finding that avoidance increased across this same time period. A more comprehensive understanding of support-seeking coping could be obtained by differentiating between efforts to seek support from peers or adults. In addition, given the presence of the quadratic effect and the data reviewed by Zimmer-Gembeck and Skinner (2011), it will be important to investigate whether support seeking increases in early adulthood. Based on Skinner and Zimmer-Gembeck’s (2007) work, we would expect support from peers and other adults to become increasingly common.

It was somewhat surprising that there was not significant variation across individuals in the slopes of most forms of coping (support seeking was the exception). This pattern suggests that most children’s coping changed in a similar manner, perhaps because normative changes in cognition and age-linked social expectations underlie change in coping for most children in a similar context.

Limitations, Strengths, and Conclusions

There were several important limitations of the present study. First, although participants were directed to complete the diary at the end of each day, it cannot be determined whether all participants followed these directions. However, even if some participants did not complete the diary at the prescribed times, because of the types of questions asked in the present study, it seems unlikely that small departures from the directions would change the pattern of findings. Nevertheless, future research may benefit from the use of electronic diaries that can document rates of compliance. Second, the diary questionnaire did not robustly assess the context of the stressful response. Therefore, we were unable to test whether the type or stressor (e.g., whether or not it was under the participants control) impacted the results. Third, the sample size was relatively modest given the complexity of the analyses. The use of FIML partially overcomes this limitation, but a larger sample size would likely result in more precise parameter estimates. Finally, participants in this study were mainly from European American and middle-class homes. It is possible that the processes involving stress, coping, and adjustment differ for less advantaged families, and we were unable to examine this question in detail due to the limited number of minority and low-income families.

Despite these limitations, our study also had a number of strengths, including the use of a daily diary to assess coping responses as participants transitioned into adolescence. Although the diary method is quite common in studies of adults’ stress and coping (Bolger, DeLongis, Kessler, & Wethington, 1990; Zautra, Affleck, Davis, Tennen, & Fasman, 2007), much of the literature on children’s and adolescents’ coping has relied upon retrospective reports of coping behaviors. By having participants complete the diary the same day the stressful event occurred, recall bias should be reduced. By having participants rate how they coped with actual stressors, this study also overcomes limitations associated with participants rating how they believe they would cope with future stressors. Importantly, the data presented here significantly advance our understanding of the longitudinal nature of coping. There are very few studies that span the time frame covered in this study and we hope the data presented here encourage further efforts to better understand the development of coping.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was funded, in part, by National Institute of Mental Health Grants 1 R01 HH55052 and 1 R01 MH60838 to Nancy Eisenberg and Richard A. Fabes.

Notes

Author Biographies

Carlos Valiente is associate professor of Family Studies in the T. Denny Sanford School of Social and Family Dynamics. His research interests include children’s stress and coping, and the roles of parenting and temperament in children’s social and academic competence.

Nancy Eisenberg, who is regents’ professor of Psychology at Arizona State University, studies social, emotional, and moral development. She has been editor of Psychological Bulletin and Child Development Perspectives. The winner of career contribution awards from both the Association for Psychological Science, multiple divisions of the American Psychological Association, and the International Society for the Study of Behavioral Development, she is currently president of the Association for Psychological Science.

Richard A. Fabes is the founding director and the John O. Whiteman Distinguished Dean’s Professor of Child Development in the T. Denny Sanford School of Social and Family Dynamics. He has published extensively in areas related to peer relationships, social-emotional development, gender, and schooling. He also is one of the Executive Directors of the Sanford Harmony Program ().

Tracy L. Spinrad’s work focuses on the contributions of individual differences in temperament, in particular, children’s effortful control and emotional reactivity to their social and emotional outcomes. In addition, her work considers parents’ roles in explicating the links between children’s temperament and later outcomes.

Michael J. Sulik received his PhD in developmental psychology from Arizona State University in 2013. He is currently an assistant research scientist in the Institute of Human Development and Social Change at New York University, where he studies the development of self-regulation and psychopathology.

References

Altshuler

J. L.

Ruble

D. N.

(1989). Developmental changes in children’s awareness of strategies for coping with uncontrollable stress. Child Development, 60, 1337-1349. doi:10.2307/1130925

Ayers

T. S.

Sandler

I. N.

West

S. G.

Roosa

M. W.

(1996). A dispositional and situational assessment of children’s coping: Testing alternative models of coping. Journal of Personality, 64, 923-958. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1996.tb00949.x

Band

E. B.

Weisz

J. R.

(1988). How to feel better when it feels bad: Children’s perspectives on coping with everyday stress. Developmental Psychology, 24, 247-253. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.24.2.247

Bernzweig

Eisenberg

Fabes

R. A.

(1993). Children’s coping in self- and other-relevant contexts. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 55, 208-226. doi:10.1006/jecp.1993.1012

Bolger

DeLongis

Kessler

R. C.

Wethington

(1990). The microstructure of daily role-related stress in married couples. In Eckenrode

Gore

(Eds.), Stress between work and family (The Plenum series on stress and coping) (pp. 95-115). New York, NY: Plenum Press.

Causey

D. L.

Dubow

E. F.

(1992). Development of a self-report coping measure for elementary school children. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 21, 47-59. doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp2101_8

Causey

D. L.

Dubow

E. F.

(1993). Negotiating the transition to junior high school: The contributions of coping strategies and perceptions of the school environment. Prevention in Human Services, 10, 59-81. doi:10.1300/J293v10n02_05

Chen

P. Y.

Popovich

P. M.

(2002). Correlation: Parametric and nonparametric measures. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Collins

W. A.

Steinberg

(2006). Adolescent development in interpersonal context. In Damon

(Series Ed.) & Eisenberg

(Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed., pp. 1003-1067). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.

10.

Compas

B. E.

(1998). An agenda for coping research and theory: Basic and applied developmental issues. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 22, 231-237. doi:10.1080/016502598384351

11.

Compas

B. E.

Connor-Smith

J. K.

Saltzman

Thomsen

A. H.

Wadsworth

M. E.

(2001). Coping with stress during childhood and adolescence: Problems, progress, and potential in theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 87-127. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.127.1.87

12.

Compas

B. E.

Malcarne

V. L.

Fondacaro

K. M.

(1988). Coping with stressful events in older children and young adolescents. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56, 405-411. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.56.3.405

13.

Connor-Smith

J. K.

Compas

B. E.

Wadsworth

M. E.

Thomsen

A. H.

Saltzman

(2000). Responses to stress in adolescence: Measurement of coping and involuntary stress responses. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 976-992. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.68.6.976

14.

De Fruyt

Bartels

Van Leeuwen

K. G.

De Clercq

Decuyper

Mervielde

(2006). Five types of personality continuity in childhood and adolescence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 538-552. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.3.538

15.

Eisenberg

Fabes

R. A.

Guthrie

I. K.

(1997). Coping with stress: The roles of regulation and development. In Wolchik

S. A.

Sandler

I. N.

(Eds.), Handbook of children’s coping: Linking theory and intervention (pp. 41-70). New York, NY: Plenum Press.

16.

Eisenberg

Fabes

R. A.

Guthrie

I. K.

Reiser

(2000). Dispositional emotionality and regulation: Their role in predict- ing quality of social functioning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 136–157. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.78.1.136

17.

Eisenberg

Fabes

R. A.

Nyman

Bernzweig

Pinuelas

(1994). The relations of emotionality and regulation to children’s anger-related reactions. Child Development, 65, 109-128. doi:10.2307/1131369

18.

Kanner

A. D.

Coyne

J. C.

Schaefer

Lazarus

R. S.

(1981). Comparison of two modes of stress measurement: Daily hassles and uplifts versus major life events. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4, 1-19. doi:10.1007/BF00844845

19.

Lazarus

R. S.

Folkman

(1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.

20.

Losoya

Eisenberg

Fabes

R. A.

(1998). Developmental issues in the study of coping. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 22, 287-313. doi:10.1080/016502598384388

21.

Mehta

P. D.

West

S. G.

(2000). Putting the individual back into individual growth curves. Psychological Methods, 5, 23-43. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.5.1.23

22.

Muthén

L. K.

Muthén

B. O.

(1998-2012). Mplus user’s guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.

23.

Rothbart

M. K.

Bates

J. E.

(2006). Temperament. In Damon

(Series Ed.) & Eisenberg

(Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed., pp. 99-166). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.

24.

Saarni

Campos

J. J.

Camras

L. A.

Witherington

(2006). Emotional development: Action, communication, and understanding. In Damon

(Series Ed.) & Eisenberg

(Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed., pp. 226-299). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.

25.

Sandler

I. N.

Tein

J. Y.

Mehta

Wolchik

Ayers

(2000). Coping efficacy and psychological problems of children of divorce. Child Development, 71, 1099-1118. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00212

26.

Sandler

I. N.

Tein

J. Y.

West

S. G.

(1994). Coping, stress, and the psychological symptoms of children of divorce: A cross-sectional and longitudinal study. Child Development, 65, 1744-1763. doi:10.2307/1131291

27.

Sandstrom

M. J.

(2004). Pitfalls of the peer world: How children cope with common rejection experiences. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32, 67-81. doi:10.1023/B:JACP.0000007581.95080.8b

28.

Singer

J. D.

Willett

J. B.

(2003). Applied longitudinal data analysis: Modeling change and event occurrence. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

29.

Skinner

E. A.

Edge

Altman

Sherwood

(2003). Searching for the structure of coping: A review and critique of category systems for classifying ways of coping. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 216-269. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.2.216

30.

Skinner

E. A.

Zimmer-Gembeck

M. J.

(2007). The development of coping. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 119-144. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085705

31.

Smith

C. L.

Eisenberg

Spinrad

T. L.

Chassin

Morris

A. S.

Kupfer

. . .Kwok

O. M.

(2006). Children’s coping strategies and coping efficacy: Relations to parent socialization, child adjustment, and familial alcoholism. Development and Psychopathology, 18, 445-469. doi:10.1017/S095457940606024X

32.

Tremblay

R. E.

(2000). The development of aggressive behaviour during childhood: What have we learned in the past century? International Journal of Behavioral Development, 24, 129-141. doi:10.1080/016502500383232

33.

Wadsworth

M. E.

Rieckmann

Benson

M. A.

Compas

B. E.

(2004). Coping and responses to stress in Navajo adolescents: Psychometric properties of the responses to stress questionnaire. Journal of Community Psychology, 32, 391-411. doi:10.1002/jcop.20008

34.

Wagner

B. M.

Compas

B. E.

Howell

D. C.

(1988). Daily and major life events: A test of an integrative model of psychosocial stress. American Journal of Community Psychology, 16, 189-205. doi:10.1007/BF00912522

35.

Zautra

A. J.

Affleck

G. G.

Davis

M. C.

Tennen

Fasman

(2007). Assessing the ebb and flow of daily life with an accent on the positive. In Ong

A. D.

van Dulmen

M. H. M.

(Eds.), Oxford handbook of methods in positive psychology (Series in positive psychology) (pp. 487-500). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

36.

Zimmer-Gembeck

M. J.

Skinner

E. A.

(2011). Review: The development of coping across childhood and adolescence: An integrative review and critique of research. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 35, 1-17. doi:10.1177/0165025410384923