The Role of Socio-Economic Status in Adoption of Coping Strategies Among Adolescents Against Domestic Violence

Abstract

In the current study, researchers explored different types of coping strategies such as problem-focused coping, emotion-focused coping, and non-constructive coping of adolescents witnessing and experiencing domestic violence. Furthermore, they tried to find out the association of socio-economic status with coping strategies against domestic violence in family sphere. A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 210 adolescents of both sexes, aged 13 to 18 years in Hafizabad city using multistage sampling technique. Multivariate analysis was used to find out the association between adolescents’ resistance and resilience strategies against domestic violence. The information was collected through a structured interview schedule. This study revealed that age, gender, parents’ education, and family income were major factors that influenced the adoption of coping strategy among adolescents. Overall, the study suggested that adolescents were being victimized of various forms of domestic violence frequently in Pakistan, which needs to be addressed on immediate basis through policies and programs by integrating the social institutions of family and education. Findings of the study can enable parents to nurture and support the developmental needs of children in their care. It can help youth in defending themselves from extreme violent behavior adopters and preventing them from becoming the perpetrators of the domestic violence.

Keywords

adolescent domestic violence coping strategies family sphere socio-economic status emotion-focused coping problem-focused coping

Introduction

Coping is a multifaceted construct yet worthy of investigation because it can be a critical point of intervention in the health trajectory of adolescents and young people (Garcia, 2010). Coping strategies refer to significant behavioral, cognitive, and/or emotional steps taken to reduce stressors as well as the psychological distress associated with the stressors (Dubow & Rubinlicht, 2011). Coping is the 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, 1991). Coping involves cognitive and behavioral measures designed to master, tolerate, or reduce external and internal demands and conflicts (Yi, Smith, & Vitaliano, 2005), whereas Skinner and Zimmer-Gembeck (2007) describe coping as the transactional processes through which people deal with actual problems in their everyday lives. Coping refers to those conscious or unconscious thoughts and actions that provide the means of dealing with a stressful event like domestic violence (Stone, Helder, & Schneider, 1988, Boxer & Sloan-Power, 2013). There has been a great deal of variation in the number of coping dimensions, approaches, and styles. But the current research has focused on only three coping strategies such as problem-focused (PF) coping, emotion-focused (EF) coping, and non-construction coping. On the basis of these coping strategies, a respondent may react differently to situation of stress or domestic violence or even other deviant behavior, he or she observes or experiences.

Scholarly literature witnessed variation in the use of coping strategies among adolescents as some preferred problems-focused coping (Reeves, Nicholls, & McKenna, 2009) while other used EF coping (Nicholls, Polman, Levy, Taylor, & Cobley, 2007). Kerig (2001) indicated that children and adults, when faced with a distressing event, typically either try to stop or alter the stressor (e.g., PF coping) or they attempt to modulate their effect without changing the situation (e.g., EF coping), perhaps by removing themselves from the source of the stress. Compas, Connor-Smith, Saltzman, Thomsen, and Wadsworth (2001) defined that engagement responses were oriented toward the source of stress or one’s emotions or thoughts (problem solving, cognitive restructuring, acceptance, and emotional control). They further indicated that disengagement coping responses were oriented away from the stressor or one’s emotions or thoughts (avoidance, denial, and withdrawal). According to Diane, Green, Choi, and Kane (2010), EF coping was related to activities aimed at controlling the emotional impact of the event, such as feelings of fear, anger, and sadness, whereas PF coping referred to those cognitive efforts utilized to regulate the stress.

Scholarly literature has proven that children use a variety of coping strategies to reconcile their trauma experiences (Hines, 2015). There are a lot of factors that contributed to the adoption of coping strategies among the people experiencing, witnessing, and observing domestic violence. According to Bowker (1983), respondent’s use of particular coping strategies was reflective of context and personal factors as well as the outcomes. Therefore, one determinant of a respondent’s choice of coping strategies would be the results that they achieved after using the strategies in the past.

Mitchell and Hodson (1983) found that institutional response and responses of social supports were important correlates of respondent’s coping strategies in the case of domestic violence in the family sphere. Sullivan, Schroeder, Dudley, and Dixon (2010) explored that as current interpersonal violence increased in women, utilization of avoidance coping strategies would increase as well. According to Skinner and Zimmer-Gembeck (2007), an individual’s response to family violence would be a function of many factors including whether or not he or she also was abused, his or her age, gender, coping style, and psychological resources. Hess and Richards (1999) found that females were more likely to cope with adversity through increased involvement in interpersonal relationships with friends and family, whereas males utilized coping strategies such as physical diversion, aggression, and overall avoidance. Yoshihama (2002) explored that cultural values and norms influenced battered women’s choices, prescribing the range of coping strategies available or acceptable to them.

Wadsworth and Compas (2002) found that exposure to economic hardship was more likely to influence the use of avoidance, denial, and wishful thinking. For women currently in an abusive relationship, Haeseler (2013) stated that many of the coping strategies they employ were related to issues of mental health status, economic needs, sociological circumstances, and their own perceptions of the domestic violence. Hague, Mullender, Kelly, Imam, and Malos (2002) demonstrated that children used wide-ranging, and often creative, coping strategies, even though the “protective factors,” which experts had identified as being essential for positive coping, were very frequently absent in the case of domestic violence.

Bauman, Haaga, and Dutton (2008) found that greater levels of violence would decrease the probability that EF coping strategies employed would be seen as helpful. Allen, Wolf, Bybee, and Sullivan (2003) found that children’s immediate coping strategies depended more on situational variables such as the frequency and type of abuse they were witnessing.

In the current study, researchers explored different types of coping strategies such as PF coping, EF coping, and non-constructive coping of individual witnessing and experiencing domestic violence in family sphere. Furthermore, this study tried to find out the association of socio-economic status (age, gender, education, monthly income, and parentage education) with coping strategies (PF coping, EF coping, and non-constructive coping) against domestic violence in family sphere.

Literature Review

A total of 69,604 incidents of child violence (≤15 years) had been reported for the period January 2000 to December 2013 in Pakistan (Madadgaar National Helpline, 2014), out of which, 39,142 cases were from Punjab, 23,166 from Sindh, 5,161 from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), and 2,135 from Baluchistan. The breakdown of child abuse cases were kidnapping (11,697), missing children (11,224), forced marriage (11,069), murder (10,192), torture (4,996), suicide (4,857), rape (4,572), sodomy (3,429), human trafficking (3,336), police torture (2,071), vani cases (1,381), and karo kari (1,107; Madadgaar National Helpline, 2014). These statistics were reported from newspaper, police reports, and electronic media. The latest reports of Society for the Protection of the Rights of the Child Pakistan (SPARCPK, 2014) and Madadgaar National Helpline (2014) reported that it might not represent the accurate prevalence of violence against children, which could be higher than reported.

The main reasons of attaining not the exact magnitude of violence against children are (a) lack of reliable national database on violence against children, (b) lack of access to reporting bodies, (c) legitimization and social acceptance of some form of violence, and (d) considering domestic violence as a private family matter (Gilligan, & Akhtar, 2006; Hyder & Malik, 2007; SPARCPK, 2014). In addition, there is paucity of research in the area of domestic violence against children in Pakistan. To the best of our knowledge, there is not a single study which assesses the coping strategies used by children of Pakistan to avoid domestic violence. Hence, the literature presented below discussed international perspective to explore the relationship of different variables and coping strategies adopted by adolescents.

Coping strategies selected in response to stressful events are contextualized in line with youths’ construction of the controllability of the event and the actual content and context of the event itself along with sociocultural factors (Tolan & Grant, 2009). Literature asserted that there were certain characteristics of children, such as sex and age, affecting the adoption of coping strategies.

Rhodes and McKenzie (1998) found that coping strategies against violence differ by age, education, income, occupation, and financial independence. According to Oosthuizen and Wissing (2005), coping strategies are influenced by the age of the adolescents, the severity or nature of the domestic violence, adolescents’ prior experiences or exposure to violence, available resources (in terms of social or emotional support), and adolescents’ emotional growth or level of maturity.

Application of coping strategies is largely affected by both verbal and non-verbal reactions from others (Moos & Holahan, 2003). Respondents with good problem-solving skills continue actively coping and resisting violence instead of passively coping or attempting to appease the perpetrator by staying away from him (Holtzworth-Munroe, Smutzler, & Bates, 1997). Similarly, greater social support may encourage victim to engage in problem-solving coping strategy (Waldrop & Resick, 2004).

Though boys are generally more exposed to violence at school and on the street, there are no gender differences in exposure to family violence (Calvete & Orue, 2011). Nevertheless, gender differences for psychosocial factors of depression, self-esteem, and anxiety indicated that several associations were seen between coping strategies and psychosocial factors of adolescents (Sung, Puskar, & Sereika, 2006). It is found that boys are more aggressive than girls when there is no provocation (Bettencourt & Miller, 1996). In addition, boys more commonly express external reactions, such as hostility and aggression, whereas girls tend to show more internalized behaviors such as depression, fear, and physical ailments (Carlson, 1991).

As far as the adoption of different type of coping strategies is concerned, use of avoidant coping strategies partially mediated the link between parental psychological violence and behavior problems among girls and similarly use of approach coping strategies partially mediated the link between parental psychological violence and behavior problems among boys (Gagné & Melançon, 2013). The reactions of children who witness violence by one parent against another may include emotional, social, cognitive, physical, and behavioral maladjustment problems (Jaffe, Wolfe, & Wilson, 1990). Most adolescents exhibited EF coping strategies rather than the PF strategies (Myors, Johnson, & Langdon, 2001).

Method

According to Waldrop and Resick (2004), a potential loophole in the coping literature on domestic violence is the issue of sampling. In the case of domestic violence survivors, samples are often taken from shelters or from agencies that serve battered women. To address this weakness in sampling, researchers selected the sample from natural setting of society, that is, we selected households and family settings. Therefore, the researchers decided to select households as universe of this study. However, due to limitations of time and cost, one city from the province of Punjab, Pakistan was selected through simple random technique. The name of the selected city was Hafizabad. Unmarried adolescents both male and female in the age group of 13 to 18 years living in Hafizabad were included in research target population.

Multistage sampling technique was used to select the respondents for the study because it is the most suitable technique to select respondents from such a broad universe as this study had. Secondly, this technique was used to ensure the probability so that every adolescent could get an equal chance of selection for this study. The district Hafizabad has two tehsils: Hafizabad and Pindi Bhattian. Therefore, in the first stage, one tehsil, Hafizabad, was selected through employing simple random sampling technique. At the second stage, two villages named Vanike Tarar and Kaleki Mandi were also selected by using the “without replacement” method of simple random sampling technique. In the last stage, the 210 respondents (105 from each village) were selected through systematic random sampling as every fifth house was selected from the list of houses.

In the current research, the researchers used an interview schedule as a tool for data collection. Keeping in view the research ethical guidelines, informed consent was prepared and was signed by every respondent’s parents or guardian. The respondents and parents/guardians were fully made aware of the details of the purpose, nature of the research, and the timing to conduct the interview. All the concepts used in the schedule were explained clearly to the respondent and parent/guardian in an understandable way and medium.

Current study adopted questionnaire as a tool of data collection while survey as technique of data collection. Questionnaire was divided into two sections. First section had question about socio-economic status like age, gender, education, parentage education, and monthly household income. Second section of the questionnaire had questions about three coping strategies: EF strategies, PF strategies, and non-constructive strategies. These variables were further divided into sub-variables. EF strategies were divided into expressing feelings, withholding feelings, aggressive actions, and negative cognitions/worrying; PF strategies were divided into cognitive decision making, direct problem solving, avoidant actions, and support-seeking; and non-constructive strategies were divided into positive cognitive restructuring, distracting actions, cognitive avoidance, and non-coping effort.

Data Analysis

After the collection of the data, the researcher systematically re-organized raw data into a format that was machine readable, that is, easy to analyze by using a computer. Different Score Indexes were used for different questions. The data was entered and analyzed through a software called Satistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), version 21. At first, researchers calculated frequency and percentages to get the basic information and sample characteristics of the respondents. The chi-square test was applied to find out the relationship between different variables of the study by using SPSS Program. The level of significance for the present study was set as less than 0.05 p values in chi-square test.

Descriptive Analysis of Coping Strategies

Descriptive analysis including frequency and percentages is given in sub-section for PF coping strategies, emotional-focused coping strategies, and non-constructive coping strategies.

PF Coping Strategies

PF coping strategies to avoid domestic violence were categorized into four types: cognitive decision making, direct problem solving, avoidant actions, and support seeking. The findings revealed that adolescents employed cognitive strategies more as compared to other types of strategies. This is because each sub-scale of cognitive decision making had the higher percentages and a majority of the adolescents agreed that they used these strategies “a lot.” Within cognitive strategies, a majority of the adolescents (49%) reported that they think a lot what could be the best thing to do, while 47% of adolescents agreed that they thought about what they could do to avoid domestic violence. The most stimulating item is that 40% of the adolescents reported that they try a lot to find out what is the problem behind this domestic violence. This cognitive decision making could lead adolescents to employ direct problem-solving strategies, and the findings are also substantiating this as a majority of adolescents replied that they do something to solve (39%) and fix (38%) the problem. As for the support-seeking behavior is concerned, 32% of the respondents would like to get help from their friends, while surprisingly on the contrary 28% of the adolescents confirmed that they never talked about the domestic violence with someone in their family (Table 1).

Table 1.

Percentage of Adolescents Resistance and Resistance Strategies Against Domestic Violence (N = 210).

Adolescents Adopting Coping Strategies	Never (%)	A Little (%)	Pretty Much (%)	A Lot (%)
Problem-focused coping strategies
Cognitive decision making
Think about what I could do before I do anything	6.7	21.9	34.8	36.7
Think about what would be the best thing to do	2.9	18.6	29.5	49.0
Go over in my mind different things that I could do	2.9	12.9	37.1	47.1
Try to find out more about what the problem is	7.6	15.2	37.1	40.0
Think about what I should do	4.3	18.6	37.6	39.5
Try to come up with a plan before I do anything	10.0	30.0	28.6	31.4
Direct problem solving
Do something to make things better	3.8	15.2	35.7	45.2
Do something so that it will work out	1.9	18.1	37.1	42.9
Do something to solve the problem	5.2	20.5	39.0	35.2
Do something to fix the problem	2.4	27.6	38.6	31.4
Avoidant actions
Try to stay away from the problem	17.6	35.2	24.8	22.4
Try to stay away from the things that upset me	15.2	16.7	34.3	33.8
Avoid the people that make me feel bad	12.4	21.4	30.0	36.2
Avoid it by going to my room	29.5	25.7	23.3	21.4
Support-seeking
Talk about the problem with someone in my family	27.6	22.4	25.2	24.8
Get help from a friend	20.0	21.0	32.4	26.7
Ask someone what I should do	13.8	27.6	30.5	28.1

EF Coping Strategies

EF coping strategies were categorized into four types: expressing feelings, withholding feelings, aggressive actions, and negative cognitions/worrying. The findings reveal that most of the adolescents express their feelings to someone as about 72% of adolescent let their feelings out while only 28% did not let their feeling out. Similarly, 73 % of the adolescents reported that they cried by themselves, out of this majority, 32% reported that they cried “a lot”. The findings show that domestic violence could influence the adolescent behavior by adopting the more aggressive actions as more than half of the adolescents reported that they never got into a fight with someone. Similarly, more than half of the adolescents reported that they yelled their aggression at someone and said mean things to other people. Moreover, the domestic violence could create a negative cognition as around three quarters of adolescents reported that they got scared (89%), thought domestic violence was result of their faults (87%) and felt bad about themselves (69%; Table 2).

Table 2.

Percentage of Adolescents Resistance and Emotion-Focused Coping Strategies Against Domestic Violence (N = 210).

Emotion-Focused Coping Strategies	Never (%)	A Little (%)	Pretty Much (%)	A Lot (%)
Expressing feelings
Let all my feelings out	28.6	33.8	18.6	19.0
Cry by myself	26.7	18.1	22.9	32.4
Let out my feelings to my pet or stuffed animal	53.3	21.9	14.8	10.0
Yell to let off steam	41.4	28.6	16.2	13.8
Let off steam by hitting my pillow or bed	51.4	21.4	17.1	10.0
Withholding feelings
Acts like it’s no big deal	19.0	26.7	33.3	21.0
Do not tell anyone how I am feeling	14.3	19.5	26.2	40.0
Aggressive actions
Get into a fight with someone	41.0	22.9	21.9	14.3
Get mad or yell at someone	37.6	28.6	18.6	15.2
Say mean things to people	45.2	24.8	18.1	11.9
Negative cognitions/worrying
Get scared that something bad could happen to me	11.9	25.2	35.2	27.6
Think it might be my fault	13.8	25.7	33.3	27.1
Feel bad about myself	29.5	28.1	25.7	16.7

Non-Constructive Coping Strategies

The non-constructive coping strategies were also categorized into four types: positive cognitive restructuring, distracting actions, cognitive avoidance, and non-coping effort. The findings show that the adolescents employed positive cognitive restructuring strategies more as only 7% to 10% adolescent opted that they never employed positive cognitive restructuring strategies. To distract their attention, the adolescents preferred to listen to music or watch TV (72%), go somewhere to play (64%), and read books or magazines (74%). However, about three quarters of the adolescents used cognitive avoidance strategies as they pretended that the domestic violence never happened to them and tried to forget about it. Most interesting findings were to note that majority (64%) of the adolescents did not stand there to face violence and majority (69%) of them knew what they could do to avoid domestic violence (Table 3).

Table 3.

Percentage of Adolescents Resistance and Non-Constructive Coping Strategies Against Domestic Violence (N = 210).

Non-Constructive Coping Strategies	Never (%)	A Little (%)	Pretty Much (%)	A Lot (%)
Positive cognitive restructuring
Try to see the good side of things	10.5	25.2	33.8	30.5
Tell myself it will be over in a short time	12.9	20.5	39.5	27.1
Tell myself that things are not that bad	11.4	26.2	35.7	26.7
Try to think only happy thoughts	7.6	24.3	34.8	33.3
Distracting actions
Go ride my bike, skateboard, or roller blade	59.5	10.0	14.3	26.2
Listen to music or watch TV	28.6	24.3	20.0	27.1
Go somewhere and play	36.7	22.4	18.1	22.9
Read a book or a magazine	26.7	21.4	29.5	22.4
Cognitive avoidance
Try to put it out of my mind	21.0	31.4	30.5	17.1
Pretend the problem never happened	15.7	27.6	34.8	21.9
Try really hard to forget about it	11.4	28.6	33.3	26.7
Non-coping effort
Just let it happen	36.2	36.2	19.0	8.6
Just stand there	37.1	35.7	19.5	7.6
I don’t know what to do	31.9	29.0	25.2	13.8

Association Between Socio-Demographic Elements and Coping Strategies

The socio-demographics such as age (p = .04), education (p = .02), number of siblings (p = .05), father’s occupation (p = .01), and family income (p = .02) were significantly associated with adoption of PF coping strategies. The demographics which highly positively associated with adopting the EF coping strategies were gender (p = .004), occupation (p = .01), father’s education (p = .02), and family income (p = .003). Nevertheless, the mother’s education (p = .04) was the only factor that was associated with adopting the non-constructive coping strategies. Among all selected socio-demographics variables, the family type, nuclear or joint, was the only factor that had no association with the adoption of any type of coping strategies (Table 4).

Table 4.

Association Between Socio-Demographic Elements and Coping Strategies.

Characteristics	Problem-Focused Coping			Emotion-Focused Coping			Non-Constructive Coping
Characteristics	A Little	A Lot	p Value	A Little	A Lot	p Value	Little	A Lot	p Value
Age
13-15	56.5	44.1	.04*	52.5	47.8	.49	50.4	50.5	.98
16-18	43.5	55.9		47.5	52.2		49.6	49.5
Gender
Female	46.3	56.9	.12	60.2	40.2	.004**	56.3	45.1	.10
Male	53.7	43.1		39.8	59.8		43.7	54.9
Education
Up to 10 years	93.5	83.3	.02*	86.4	91.3	.27	86.6	91.2	.29
>10 years	6.5	16.7		13.6	8.7		13.4	8.8
No. of siblings
1-6	95.4	88.2	.05*	91.5	92.4	.81	89.9	94.5	.22
Above 6	4.6	11.8		8.5	7.6		10.1	5.5
Occupation
Non-working	69.4	79.4	.09	67.8	82.6	.01*	70.6	79.1	.16
Working	30.6	20.6		32.2	17.4		29.4	20.9
Family type
Nuclear	61.1	65.7	.49	62.7	64.1	.83	63.9	62.6	.85
Joint	38.9	34.3		37.3	35.9		36.1	37.4
Father education
Up to 10 years	75.0	66.7	.18	77.1	63.0	.02*	72.3	69.2	.37
>10 years	25.0	33.3		22.9	37.0		27.7	30.8
Father occupation
Laborer	22.2	6.9	.01*	14.4	15.2	.59	15.1	14.3	.38
Agriculture	29.6	42.2		38.1	32.6		38.7	31.9
Private business	27.8	27.5		28.8	26.1		28.6	26.4
Government employee	20.4	23.5		18.6	26.1		17.6	27.5
Mother education
Up to 10 years	87.0	81.4	.26	88.1	79.3	.06	79.8	90.1	.04*
>10 years	13.0	18.6		11.9	20.7		20.2	9.9
Family income
<35,000	75.0	56.9	.02*	75.4	54.3	.003**	68.9	62.6	.56
35,000-69,999	21.3	35.3		22.0	35.9		25.2	31.9
>70,000	3.7	7.8		2.5	9.8		5.9	5.5

p > .01. *p > .05.

The factors that were significant were being discussed one by one in detail. Age was significantly associated with using PF coping strategies as compared with emotion or non-constructive coping strategies. The findings suggest that increase in age led to employ PF coping strategies as the adolescents belonging to the age group of 16 to 18 years were using PF coping strategies more as compared to adolescents in the 13 to 15 years age group.

It is evident from the Table 4 that gender has a significant relationship (p = .004) with the adolescents adopting EF coping strategies. A majority (60.2%) of the females adopted EF coping strategies a little as compared with males (39.8%), whereas majority of the males (59.8%) adopted the EF coping strategies a lot as compared with females (40.2%).

Education of the respondents had an association (p = .02) with the PF coping strategies. Majority of the adolescents having education up to 10 years of schooling reported adopting PF coping strategies a little, and 83.3% of the respondents adopted the PF strategies a lot. Whereas 93.5% of the adolescents with schooling years up to 10 years reported that they adopted PF coping strategies a little. Only 6.5% of the respondents with more than 10 schooling years said that they adopted PF coping strategies a little. (Table 4)

Table 4 also shows that there is an association (p = .05) between number of siblings and adolescents adopting PF coping strategies. Majority of the adolescents (95.4%) having one to six siblings reported having adopted PF coping strategies a little, whereas only 4.6% of the respondents having more than six siblings adopted PF strategies a little. Also most of the respondents (88.2%) with one to six siblings said that they had adopted PF coping strategies a lot and only 11.8% of the adolescents with more than six siblings reported having adopted the PF coping strategies a lot.

An association was found between father occupation (p > .05) and adolescents adopting EF coping strategies. Most of the (67.8% and 92.4%) non-working adolescents reported having adopted EF coping strategies to a little and to a lot, respectively, whereas 32.2% of the respondents reported to have adopted the EF coping strategies a little. (Table 4)

It is clear from the table above that there is a significant relationship (p = .01) between the father’s occupation and adolescents adopting PF strategies. Majority of the respondents (42.2%) from agricultural family background reported having adopted PF coping strategies a lot, whereas 29.6% reported having adopted the PF strategies a little. Among the laborer families, only 6.9% of the adolescents reported having adopted PF strategies a lot.

It is clear from Table 4 that mother’s education had a significant relationship (p = .04) with the adolescents adopting non-constructive coping strategies. Majority (90.1%) of the adolescents with mother’s education up to 10 years of schooling reported having adopted non-constructive coping strategies a lot as compared with adolescents (9.9%) whose mothers had more than 10 years of schooling, whereas 79.8% of the respondents with mother’s education up to 10 years of schooling said to have adopted non-constructive coping strategies a little as compared with adolescents (20.2%) whose mothers had more than 10 years of schooling. (Table 4)

Familial income had an association (p = .02) with the adolescents adopting PF coping strategies. More than 50% (56.9%) of the respondents with familial income less than 35,000 Pakistani Rupees (PKR) reported having adopted PF strategies a lot during the last 1 year within the domestic sphere. Most of the adolescents (75%) with familial income less than 35,000 PKR said they adopted PF coping strategies a little, whereas only 3.7% respondents with family income more than 70,000 PKR reported to have adopted PF coping strategies a little, and 7.8% of the adolescents with the same familial income adopted PF coping strategies a lot (Table 4).

Discussion

This study described the association of socio-economic status in adoption of coping strategies by adolescents who were experiencing domestic violence. The selected types of coping strategies for this study were EF strategies, PF strategies, and non-constructive strategies.

This study found that adolescents exhibited adopting EF and PF coping strategies more as compared to non-constructive coping strategies. This study is aligned with the study conducted by Myors et al. (2001) who reported that adolescents exhibited EF and PF coping strategies more as compared to non-constructive coping strategies. Moreover, they further reported that adolescents adopted EF coping strategies more as compared to PF strategies.

Familial income was the only factor among all selected socio-economic variables which was related in adoption of two types of coping strategies, PF and EF strategies, whereas rest of the factors were associated either with one coping strategy or with none of them.

This study found that the difference in age was significantly associated with using PF coping strategies as compared to EF or non-constructive coping strategies. This finding is partially aligned with the findings of Oosthuizen and Wissing (2005) coping strategies, which stated that adoption of coping strategies was influenced by the age of adolescents or adolescents’ emotional growth or level of maturity. Changes in coping preferences with increased age were observed for both sexes (Zanini, Forns, & Kirchner, 2005). The study is partially contrasted with the findings of the study conducted by Wilson, Pritchard, and Revalee (2005). Females use EF, problem-solving strategies, and avoidant coping more likely than males.

This study also highlighted that gender had a significant relationship with adopting of EF coping strategies as compared to PF and non-constructive coping strategies. The similar finding revealed by Puskar and Grabiak (2008) that coping responses differed significantly by gender and girls endorsed approach, avoidance, and behavioral responses more than boys. The previously conducted study by Sung et al. (2006) also asserted that male and female adolescent differently adopt EF coping strategies. According to Gruszczyńska (2013), significant gender differences were revealed, mainly for coping strategies, that is, at each assessment men reported the lower coping intensity than women. Moreover, Stanton and Franz (1999) reported that women were more successful in utilizing EF coping, whereas men were more successful in utilizing PF coping.

Number of siblings shows that adolescent have some emotional and social support (Waldrop & Resick, 2004). This study asserted that there is an association between number of siblings and adolescents adopting PF coping strategies. Waldrop and Resick (2004) found the similar findings and reported that greater social support may encourage victim to engage in PF coping strategies (Waldrop & Resick, 2004).

Adolescents used different coping strategies such as EF strategies, PF strategies, and non-constructive strategies because adolescents are more active, have a broader range of coping strategies, and are more able to view problems from multiple perspectives (Seiffge-Krenke, 2000). The difference in adopting different coping strategies might be due to different and broader social-cultural context in which the outcomes of coping reaction may be conceptualized with respect to the effectiveness of the coping effort and ultimately its role in promoting adaptation or maladaptation or a pattern of constructive or destructive behavior (Tolan & Grant, 2009).

Limitations and Future Research

Although this study provided some important insights into adolescent’s attitudes toward types of coping strategies against domestic violence, it has some limitations. Several schools took part in the study; the number of adolescents cannot be seen as a national representation. Besides, the present findings were limited by age and rural location of the sample. Despite limitations, this study can enable parents to understand, nurture and support the developmental needs of children in their care. It can help youth in defending themselves from extreme violent behavior adopters and preventing them from becoming the perpetrators of domestic violence.

This study used person-centered analysis of coping styles; therefore, future studies can be on some interventions aimed at helping adolescents experiencing domestic violence and to assess the extent to which teaching coping strategies can facilitate in coping domestic violence. Future studies should compare the effects of rural and urban background on coping across age groups. This research used quantitative methods, and it is suggested that future studies can be conducted using qualitative methods to understand the pattern of coping styles.

Conclusion

Age, education, number of siblings, father’s education, and household family income had positive relationship with PF coping strategies. Gender, occupation, father’s education, and household family income were also significant with emotion-focused coping strategies. It was concluded that mother’s education had a significant relationship with the adolescents adopting non-constructive coping strategies. According to Carlson (1997), use of coping strategies can be influenced by increasing the knowledge and decreasing the prevalence of domestic violence in the family sphere.

In Pakistan, domestic violence against adolescents remains unidentified, and it is often hidden under words of “disciplining” a child. There is need to introduce effective and long-recognized effective prevention and intervention programs at provincial and national level. Program on personal safety and injury prevention should also be initiated particularly at communities and educational institutions to enhance adolescents’ resilience attitude and aptitude (Rew, 2005). As violence at young age has “ripple effects,” the focus of program should be on short-term cognitive-behavioral interventions for adolescents who are exposed to violence to defuse negative emotions before they trigger adverse behavioral reactions.

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) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Saeed Ahmad is teaching Sociology at University of Gujrat, Pakistan. He has also worked in Social Welfare and Women Development Department, Punjab. His research interests include Sociology of social media, plagiarism, political sociology and youth studies.

Sayyeda Maida Ishtiaq is PhD scholar in Sociology at University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan. She is working in social welfare department, Punjab. Her research interests include gender studies and sociology of education.

Mudasir Mustafa is PhD scholar in Sociology at University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan. She is extensively involved in theoretical and operational research in areas of digital sociology, gender and human rights, and medical sociology.

References

Allen

E. N.

Wolf

M. A.

Bybee

I. D.

Sullivan

M. C.

(2003). Diversity of children’s immediate coping responses to witnessing domestic violence. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 3, 123-147. doi:10.1300/J135v03n01_06

Bauman

M. E.

Haaga

A. F. D.

Dutton

A. M.

(2008). Coping with intimate partner violence: Battered women’s use and perceived helpfulness of emotion-focused coping strategies. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 17, 23-41. doi:10.1080/10926770802250942

Bettencourt

B. A.

Miller

. (1996). Gender differences in aggression as function of provocation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 422-447.

Bowker

L. H.

(1983). Beating wife-beating. Lexington, MA: Lexington Press.

Boxer

Sloan-Power

(2013). Coping with violence: A comprehensive framework and implications for understanding resilience. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 14, 209-221. doi:10.1177/1524838013487806

Calvete

Orue

(2011). The impact of violence exposure on aggressive behavior through social information processing in adolescents. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 81, 35-50.

Carlson

B. E.

(1991). Outcomes of physical abuse and observation of marital violence among adolescents in placement. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 6, 526-534.

Carlson

B. E.

(1997). A stress and coping approach to intervention with abused women. Family Relations, 46, 291-298.

Compas

B. E.

Connor-Smith

J. K.

Saltzman

Thomsen

A. H.

Wadsworth

M. E.

(2001). Coping with stress during childhood and adolescence: Progress, problems, and potential in theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 87-127.

10.

Diane

Green

L. D.

Choi

J. J.

Kane

N. M.

(2010). Coping strategies for victims of crime: Effects of the use of emotion-focused, problem-focused, and avoidance-oriented coping. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 20, 732-743. doi:10.1080/10911351003749128

11.

Dubow

E. F.

Rubinlicht

(2011). Coping. In Brown

B. B.

Prinstein

(Eds.), Encyclopedia of adolescence (pp. 109-118). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

12.

Gagné

M. H.

Melançon

(2013). Parental psychological violence and adolescent behavioral adjustment: The role of coping and social support. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 28, 176-200. doi:10.1177/0886260512448842

13.

Garcia

(2010). Conceptualization and measurement of coping during adolescence: A review of the literature. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 42, 166-185. doi:10.1111/j.1547-5069.2009.01327.x

14.

Gilligan

Akhtar

(2006). Cultural barriers to the disclosure of child sexual abuse in Asian communities: Listening to what women say. British Journal of Social Work, 36, 1361-1377.

15.

Gruszczyńska

(2013). State affect and emotion-focused coping: Examining correlated change and causality. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping: An International Journal, 26, 103-119. doi:10.1080/10615806.2011.633601

16.

Haeseler

A. L.

(2013). Women’s coping experiences in the spectrum of domestic violence abuse. Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 10, 33-43. doi:10.1080/15433714.2013.750551

17.

Hague

Mullender

Kelly

Imam

Malos

(2002). How do children understand and cope with domestic violence? Practice: Social Work in Action, 14, 17-26. doi:10.1080/09503150208414289

18.

Hess

R. S.

Richards

M. L.

(1999). Developmental and gender influences on coping: Implications for skills training. Psychology in the Schools, 36, 149-158.

19.

Hines

(2014). Children’s coping with family violence: Policy and service recommendations. Child Adolescent Social Work Journal, 32, 109-119. doi:10.1007/s10560-014-0333-9

20.

Holtzworth-Munroe

Smutzler

Bates

(1997). A brief review of the research on husband violence, part III: Socio demographic factors, relationship factors, and differing consequences of husband and wife violence. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 2, 285-307.

21.

Hyder

A. A.

Malik

F. A.

(2007). Violence against children: A challenge for public health in Pakistan. Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition, 25, 168-178.

22.

Jaffe

P. G.

Wolfe

D. A.

Wilson

S. K.

(1990). Children of battered women. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

23.

Kerig

P. K.

(2001). Children’s coping with interparental conflict. In Grych

J. H.

Fincham

F. D.

(Eds.), Interparental conflict and child development: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 213-248). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

24.

Lazarus

R. S.

(1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

25.

Madadgaar National Helpline. (2014). Database on violence against children. Retrieved from http://madadgaar.org/data.html

26.

Mitchell

R. E.

Hodson

C. A.

(1983). Coping with domestic violence: Social support and psychological health among battered women. American Journal of Community Psychology, 11, 629-654.

27.

Moos

R. H.

Holahan

C. J.

(2003). Dispositional and contextual perspectives on coping: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 59, 1387-1403.

28.

Myors

Johnson

Langdon

(2001). Coping styles of pregnancy adolescents. Public Health Nursing, 18, 24-32.

29.

Nicholls

A. R.

Polman

Levy

A. R.

Taylor

Cobley

(2007). Stressors, coping, and coping effectiveness: Gender, type of sport, and skill differences. Journal of Sports Sciences, 25, 1521-1530.

30.

Oosthuizen

C. M.

Wissing

P. M.

(2005). Prevalence of violence against women: Distress, coping and psychological well-being. Surviving the fire? South African Journal of Psychology, 35, 637-656.

31.

Puskar

K. R.

Grabiak

B. R.

(2008). Rural adolescents’ coping responses: Implications for behavioral health nurses. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 29(5), 523-535.

32.

Reeves

C. W.

Nicholls

A. R.

McKenna

(2009). Stressors and coping strategies among early and middle adolescent premier league academy soccer players: Differences according to age. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 21, 31-48.

33.

Rew

(2005). Adolescent health: A multidisciplinary approach to theory, research, and intervention. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

34.

Rhodes

N. R.

McKenzie

E. B.

(1998). Why do battered women stay? Three decades of research. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 3, 391-406.

35.

Seiffge-Krenke

(2000). Causal links between stressful events, coping style, and adolescent symptomatology. Journal of Adolescence, 23, 675-691.

36.

Skinner

E. A.

Zimmer-Gembeck

(2007). The development of coping. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 119-144.

37.

SPARCPK. (2014). Violence against children. Retrieved from http://www.sparcpk.org/

38.

Stanton

A. L.

Franz

(1999). Focus on emotion: An adoptive coping strategy? In Snyder

C. R.

(Ed.), Coping: The psychology of what works (pp. 90-118). New York, NY: Oxford University Press

39.

Stone

A. A.

Helder

Schneider

M. M.

(1988). Coping with stressful events: Coping dimensions and issues. In Coehn

L. H.

(Ed.), Life events and psychological functioning: Theoretical and methodological issues (pp. 182-210). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

40.

Sullivan

T. P.

Schroeder

J. A.

Dudley

D. N.

Dixon

J. M.

(2010). Do differing types of victimization and coping strategies influence the type of social reactions experienced by current victims of intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women, 16, 638-657.

41.

Sung

M. K.

Puskar

R. K.

Sereika

(2006). Psychosocial factors and coping strategies of adolescents in rural Pennsylvania High School. Public Health Nursing, 23, 523-530.

42.

Tolan

P. H.

Grant

(2009). How social and cultural contexts shape the development of coping: Youth in the inner-city as an example. In Skinner

E. A.

Zimmer-Gembeck

M. J.

(Eds.), Coping and the development of regulation: New directions for child and adolescent development (pp. 61-74). New York, NY: Jossey-Bass.

43.

Wadsworth

Compas

(2002). Coping with family conflict and economic strain: The adolescent perspective. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 12, 243-274.

44.

Waldrop

E. A.

Resick

A. P.

(2004). Coping among adult female victims of domestic violence. Journal of Family Violence, 19, 291-302.

45.

Wilson

G. S.

Pritchard

M. E.

Revalee

(2005). Individual differences in adolescent health symptoms: The effects of gender and coping. Journal of Adolescence, 28, 369-379.

46.

J. P.

Smith

R. E.

Vitaliano

P. P.

(2005). Stress-resilience, illness, and coping: A person-focused investigation of young women athletes. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 28, 257-265.

47.

Yoshihama

(2002). Battered women’s coping strategies and psychological distress: Differences by immigration status. American Journal of Community Psychology, 30, 429-452.

48.

Zanini

D. S.

Forns

Kirchner

(2005). Coping responses and problem appraisal in Spanish adolescents. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 100, 153-166.