F

Coping as a Concept in Family Theory

Patr ic ia A. H. Dyk'*Jay D. Schvaneveldt

With the increased interest in stress theory, "coping" has become apopular concept in lamily science. Most studies haue focused onindiuiduaL coping behauior of f'amily members as the1, deal uithstressful situations ranging from normal to catastrophic. Howeuer,there is an increasing neecl to ttnderstand hotu /amilies cope asgroups. To date, there has not been an in-clepth discLtssion orclarification of coping as a family-leuel construct. By reuiewingthe deuelopment of the concept of coping to its integration intocurrent family studles and theory building efforts, this paperenhances clariftcation of family coping with encouragement tlntfuture research elforts be directed toward increased understandingof this complex, multi-dimensionaL concept.

With the increased interest in stress theory, "coping" has become apopular concept in the family sciences. lIost studies have focused onindividual coping behavior of family members as they deal with stressfulsituations ranging from normal to catastrophic. Scholars have rended todescribe how individual family members cope in or on behalf of famiiies. nothow families cope as groups or coilective entities. However, there is repeatedreference in the literature of rhe need to understand more about theinteractions of individual coping strr,ltegies and their combined effects onfamily relationships (e.g. Nfenaghan. 1983; Voydanoff, 1983), to integrateindividual-level and family-level van rbles (Patterson & NlcCubbin, 1984), andto attend to the multiple interdeper dent levels of the social system lWalker,1985), in an attempb to understand I re process of families under stress.

Although the concept of individu,rl coping has been addressed extensivelyin psychological literature and in a reeent review by Menaghan t1983), there

* Patr ic ia A. H. Dyk is a PhD student in the Family and Human Deveiopmentprogram at Utah State University, Logan, Utah 84322. Jay D. Schvaneveldt is aprofessor of Family and Human Deveioprnent at Utah State Universlty. Requests forrepr ints shouid be sent to Patr ic ia Dyk. The authors express apprecrat lon toHamilton I. McCubbin and Elizabeth G. l lenaghan for their consuuctive crrt iques of

an earl ier draft of this art icie presented at the i6th Annual Pre-conference

Workshop on Theory Construction and Research Methodology at the Natronal Counci l

on Family Relat ions Annual Nleeting, Dearborn, MI, November, 1986.

Key words: Coping, family, stress, cr isis, famrly scrence.

November, 1987 FA}I ILY SCIENCE REVIEW ')a

has been no in-depth discussion of coping as a family-level concept' Recent

efforts to formularr'L"J"f" "f family-."ii"g (R.eiss & O,liveri' 1980) and to

integrate family ."pi;;-i"; family- stress "models (Mccubbin & Patterson'

1gg3) have begu"'*'"riiJ r."v .irrror-ltion toward the development of a

familyJevel concept. s'ince it i" irrrporlu"t- to theory development, research'

and applicabion to itut" u clear idea of concepts' in this paper we hope to

enhance the .ru"it-"liio"- of family topi"g by integrating and reviewing

""r** "t"dies and theory building efforts'

DEVELOPMENT OF COPING AS A CONCEPT

In everyday language' Webster's Third New Internationol Dictionary

defines coping as ,,to L." o. encounter and to find necessary expedients to

overcome probtems ;;-;iff"rlties" (167i, p. sozl. More specifircallv, coping

in rhe family dtl'-.;;'-ll tru."i u^.t to at least two disciplinarv

fru*"*ort s--psychological and family sociological'

Psychological

Coping, though cur-rently 'h",

focus of psychotherapies' educational

programs, and muJh pop literatulg' has been important to psychology for over

40 years. rr, *'"'p'i"'f,' togical Abstra'cts' copin! behavior is described as the

,,use of conscious o, .rrr.on."iot" 't'uLgies

or T9:!?ni*ts in adapting to

stress, various disorders, o" "rruirorr**iiL

O1-.nds" (American Psychological

Association, 1982)'

Lazarus and Folkman (1984) set forth a detailed description of the

development of the coping concept. in addition, Lazarus' work (Lazarus &

Launier, 1e?8) "i* "lu?g"rv ;n":** tn:

-t^111.- *"- psvchoanalvtic

concept ions,whichui***d.opi , ,gas. largelyunconsciousresponsestointernalconflicts (Haan, ffil; ; ttt" tJru of cognitiv-e appraisal in shaping responses

t0 externat ,trus"o." and guidirrg .op-i; *ffoti1. social learning theorists

also have contributed t0 th; "orr."pt.tutiJution

of coping (Bandura' 1977) by

emphasizing the process_of recipro"uiint*ruction between the person and the

environment. nl""rrt formulalion*- h;;; empttasi"ed the "active role the

individual pruv" ir, "onstruing

his or t ",

p"v.trological world and in utilizing

resources to manage stress o,. _ to'--.rrJairy problematic aspects of the

environment" 6;;;; Price and Wortman' 1985' p' 550)'

RecentreviewsbyHaan(1982)andMoosandBi l l ings(1982)speaktoihecontroversy within psychology *. * t'"* topi"g should be conceptualized and

measured. stuJi""-*ressiig *tettei coping"uettavior is cross-situationally

consistent trr"-*t*" that"peopr"-rno* lit"tle consistency in their coping

strategies across iii" -ii".ii"n"

oo[.r-"r, & t u".t.rs, 1980) or across different

roledomainssuchascopingwithworkstressormari ta ld issat isfact ion(Pearl in & Schooler, 1978) '

Another controversy focuses around the extent to which people are

aware of their coping efforts' Presuming some coping efforts are

unconscious. Hass€ss lheir orcompare self-n

Numerouclassify them ito be no curreldimensions ofsit,uation fromof rhe problemthree dimensxsimultaneously

Lazarusconceprualizau-consLently clerternal and,othe resourcesdefinitrons usei

fomi\ Scx'ro/r1

The famrork of ReuhBurr , 1973r.e manager of r

In the latrgument thatlrrh should b&find as striLere or devrarengrh€nrngGntlturul) a!clrnrn^ung th

Ths rau

-cadc

reYFrct rL. 1960f-E to slnoidt of fidtiirl trrd

;rnbr ond JfrHrHt

ls, r, ! f tSF. l

I

24 FAMILY SCIENCE REVIEW November, 1987

*r

unconscious, Haan (1982) has criticized the assumption that people are able toassess their own coping abilities. However, few attempts have been made tocompare self-reports with clinical observations.

Numerous coping strategies have been identified and attempts made toclassify them into conceptual domains (Moos & Billings, 1982). There appearsto be no current consensus about a coping typology. However, lhree commondimensions of coping responses seem to include those that: (1) modify thesituation from which the strainful experience arises; (2) control the meaningof the problem; and (3) manage the stress (Pearlin & Schooler, (1978). Thesethree dimensions are not considered mutually exclusive and can be appliedsimultaneously or sequentially to a given problem.

Lazarus and Folkman (1984) have formulated a definition andconceptualization of the coping process wherein they define coping as a"constantly changing cognitive and behavioral effort to manage specificexternal and/or internal demands that are appraised as taxing or exceedingthe resources of the person" (p. 141). This definition is very similar todefinitions used by family theorists in their studies of coping.

Family Sociologiaal

The family sociological perspective on coping stems from the classicwork of Reuben Hill (1949) and the synthesis of Hill 's framework by WesleyBurr (1973). This latter work depicts the family as a reactor to stress and asa manager of resources within the flamily system.

In the late 1970's, McCubbin (1979) presenbed evidence to supporl theargument that coping behavior is an integral part of family resources and assuch should be incorporated into family stress iheory. Coping was broadlydefined as strategies for managing stress. He asserted that the family wouldhave or develop, and employ a range of coping strategies directed atstrengthening its internal organization and functioning, at procuringcommunity and social supports, and in some cases, at diverting, reducing oreliminating the source of stress.

This integration of coping into stress theory was highlighted in a 1980decade review article in the Journal of Marciage and the Family (McCubbin,et al., 1980). The authors indicated that the interest in family coping and itslink to successful individual adjustment signaled a shift in priorities in thestudy of family behavior to understand how families successfully negotiatecritical transition points. The shift from stress as a debilitating factor to aprevalent one led to an increased interest in coping. Stress was viewed as anormal factor of everyday life. There was a shift from questioning whyfamilies had problems to how families dealt with stressors.

Recent studies of family coping (e.g. McCubbin, Cauble, & Patberson,1982; Stetz, Lewis & Primono, 1986) have reemphasized the importance ofadaptation, maintaining family unity, and the use of social support. However,most studies still focus on the coping of individual family members such as

November. 1987 FAMILY SCIENCE REVIEW 25

bhe wife (Boss, Mccubbin, & Lester, 19?9) or parents (Barbarin, Hughes, &

chesler, 1985; schil l ing, Gilchrist, & schinke, 1984) and not the family as a

unit.

progress has been made in the clarif icabion of individual coping patterns

arrd ,eceitly of coping patterns of families. However, the l iterature is replete

with examites ot- the variety of coping terms (i.e. coping sLrat€gies, coping

methods, coping mechanisms, coping repertoires) that are used, often

interchange.Uty, *itttout defining the meaning of the coping variables' This

inconsisten.y itt terminology at the individual level is one factor that' has

contributed to the lack of conceptual clarity and interrelation of variables at

the family level. Clarif ication of coping variables and the bridging of

individual and family-level coping concepls is a flormidable and ch:rl lenging

task for family scientists, yet a necessary step for future research and lheory

development. Recent development of family coping models wil l now be

considered.

FORMULATION OF COPING MODELS

Family Paradigm

Reiss and oliveri (1980) purport Lhat families develop "paradigms" or

unified cognitive appraisals of bhemselves irnd cheir relation to the

environmenl. This new idea or approach, born in crisis, serves as a

background and orienting perspective to the family's problem solving in daily

l ife. They have defined coping as a response when:

the family is called upon to exert unusual effort: to observe, to

experience, to define, to undersband, and to take some kind of

special action so that it can return to the more orderly routines of

dai ly l iv ing (P. 431).

Reiss and oliveri view family coping as a process of balancing multiple

dimensions of family life lhrough adaptive capacities of Lhe firmily

(configUration, coordination, and closure). In contrast to other studies on

coping strategies, these researchers make no conclusions as to the

adaptlveness ol straiegies, but hold to the premise thai coping strategies must

be employed by each family based upon its own objectives and assumptions

about the environment.

Although this model views coping at the family level' we would concur

with Klein (1983) that the notion of a family paradigm is flawed in some

respects. It is presumed that all family members will function as a unit at

either a high or low level on each dimension. But how are variations within

the family on each dimension b be handled? If all members do not score

high, say in configuration, is lhe average of bhe scores considered, or a

wJighted average based upon other family resources controlled by individual

meibers? Also, can families which rate extremely low on configuration act

together to develop a paradigm? Although strong as a model of the family

reicting to ibs environment, Reiss and Oliveri 's (1980) model fails to

incorporate cheimplementr t ron

Double ABCI .i

Familv scobserved diffesitualions. ThABCX family ,,che fami ly 's crf.rmily makes o

The origrrrnfluencing fanbr ing about c ladirptation. \ lta Double ABIvar iables inclurdentif ied as acomponents, nfamilies try tomay be directcmanaging theintegrity and nand (5) implemthe new demaslressor specihlife at, che sarne

Famil; Adjusn

trIcCubbinrnto t.he Familrdentifies, descrIn respons€ toadaptive famrlappear to be Ipossible interre

In thrs scconceptual clarcoplng resourot

Delinttictn

K")' to Iconsrdered .rn

\orernoer. y l l

26 FAMILY SCIENCE REVIEW November, 1987

incorporate the dynamics within the family structure that could affect theimplementation of coping strategies.

Double ABCX Model

Family scholars have attempted to identify variables thab account for bheobserved differences among families in their adaptations bo stressfulsituations. The earliest conceptual foundation was Hill 's well known (1949)ABCX family crisis model where A (the stressor event), interacting with B(the family's crisis meeting resources), interacting with C (the deFrnition thefamily makes of the event), produce X (the crisis).

The original study implementing this model revealed additional factorsinfluencing family adaptation including family coping strategies designed lobring about changes in family slructure in an effort to achieve positiveadaptation. McCubbin and Patterson (1983) used Hill's formulation to advancea Double ABCX Model of family behavior that incorporated post-crisisvariables including the coping strategies families employ. Coping wasidentified as a bridging concepi that includes both cognitive and behavioralcomponents, resources, perceptions, and behavioral responses interact asfamilies try to achieve a balance in family functioning. Family coping effortsmay be directed at (1) eliminating and/or avoiding stressors and strains; (2)managing the hardships of the situation; (3) maintaining the family system'sintegrity and morale; (4) acquiring and developing resources to meet demands;and (5) implementing structural changes in the family system to accommodatethe new demands (McCubbin, 1979). Coping was identified as not beingstressor specific, but involving efforts to manage various dimensions of familylife at the same time.

Family Adjustment and Aduptation Response (FAAR)

McCubbin and Patterson (1983) have expanded the Double ABCX modelinto the Family Adjustment and Adaptation Response (FAAR) model whichidentifies, describes, and integrates the process components of family behaviorin response to a stressor and to a family crisis by including adjustment andad:rptive family-level coping strategies. The strengths of the FAAR modelappear to be that it considers coping as a process and shows a pattern forpossible interrelations of family coping variables.

FAMILY COPING AS A CONCEPT

In this section, we will present a deflrnition of family coping and severalconceptual clarifications. These include coping as a process, coping functions,coping resources, coping strategies and coping efTectiveness.

Definition

Key to the conceptconsidered and integrated

November, 1987

of family coping are three levels that must beinto a model of family coping. The first level is

FAMILY SCIENCB REVIEW 27

the individual. Coping is viewed as the cognitive and behavioral effort made

by the individual lo master, resolve, toierate, or reduce demands that tax or

exceed her or his personal resources and the styies and efforts employed.

Menaghan (1983) has thoroughly reviewed individual coping and reference is

made to her article for further study.

The second level can be referred to as the int'ra'family level. It is at

this level that the unit of analysis shifts to subsystems within the family (i.e.

husband-wife) or the individual's relationship to the family unit (absent

father-remainder of family).

The rhird level is that of the family level. Here, lhe unir of anal-"*sis is

the family es a whole, a group. It is at this level that coping aids in

promoting a better f it belween environmental and famil- '" demands.

The authors suggest that the family remain the unit of anal-"*sis and that

the following dynamic conceptual definit ion be .rdopted: Family coping is rhe

effort of the family system to master, [olerate, or reduce demands thal tax or

exceed the family's resources and the strategies employed. Ideaily, efforts by

individual family members, subsystems, and rhe famiiy unit wil l be aimed at

achieving a balance in the family system thal promotes individual growth and

development (individual level), facii i tates organization and unity i in[ra'famiiy

level), and manages external andior internal demands assessed by the family

as exceeding current family resources (family level). However, it must be

recognized rhat although efforts may be aimed a[ such a baiance. individuai

growth may be sacrif iced to family unity, or family uniLy expended in favor

of one or more individual's growth, or a combinarion of both where the

family unit is more disorganized and family members' individuai development is

also sbunted.

Family Coping as a Process

To define family coping as constantly changrng describes a process.

Individual family members, their relationship ro each other, and family'

environment relalionships are conslantly changing, necessitatlng reevaluation

which in Lurn influences subsequenb coping effort 's. This coping process ts

continually mediated by cognitive reappraisals and behavioral efforts Lo

maintain a sense of balance in the family system.

To understand this aspect of the concepl, several dimensions of coping

must be considered: the stages of family coping with respect to 3 particular

evenq phases of coping; family coping over the l ife cycie; and coping rvirh

multiple stressors.

The uhree stages of famiiy coping with respect to a particuiar event are

anticipation, impact, and post-impact. Studies shedding l ight on this aspect

of coping have focused on specific l i fe events such as the birth of a child

iVentura and Boss, 1983), per iodic absence of business execut ive fathers lBoss

et al , 19?9), and unemployment tVoydanoff , 1983).

During tissues such .:event or mrrustrategies rarfamily.

Dur ineprevious stagto deal with :

As theemerge focus,lo return lo :level of entrc:

This Pr,father 's iossreach an imcstage of unerwork indivrohardships. ermay set rhrthemseives b.earning roiewhich in turnbe necessarl '

The ianReiss and Olrprobiem-solvrdecision. Tlexamining :them as seqiorder. Wirhrbased upon i t

Anotherand Pattersorof resistancevar ious eoacphase rs pi-eclinearlf irrrrway or fo i los

This eqassumes I 3rterm, other sin the ceseFamil l ' coprrdramaticeil l '

November, l :3128 FAMILY SCIENCE REVIEW November, 1987

-

During the anticipation stage, the family must cognitively deal with suchissues such as: Can it be prevented? What can be done to prepare for theevent or minimize the impact? If unpreventable, can it be folerated? Coping'strategies ringing from'avdidance to problem-scilving can be employed by thefamily.

During the impact stage, some of lhe thoughts and actions in theprevious stage become moot. In addition, new strategies must be implemented

to deai with any discrepancies between anticipation and reality'

As the family moves into lhe post-impact stage, new considerslionsemerge focused around "Now what?" evaluations. Can or does the family rvant

[o return to the status qtto ante? These responses in turn may lead to a nelv

level of ancicipation.

This process can be illustrated in the case of a family faced with a

father's loss of job. The anticipation stage may begin with the layoff notice.

reach an impact with the last day of work, and proceed into the post-impact

stage of unemployment. Throughout each stage, family members will need towork individually and together to accommodate changes in resources,

hardships, and role deflrnitions. The coping strategies employed by the family

may set the scene for further anticipation processes as the strategiesthemselves become sources of further stress. The assumption of lhe income

earning role by the wife could lead to feelings of resentment in either spousewhich in lurn creales new stress. Even after reemployment, adjustments may

be necessary as the new job may be less desirable or necessitarc a move.

The family coping process also can be considered in rerms of phases.

Reiss and Oliveri (f980) set forth chree phases of family coping born out of aproblem-solving framework: definition. trial action, and commi[ment to

decision. They view these phases as three conceptual vantage points for

examining a family's response to a stressful event rather than considering

them as sequentiai phases which foilow one another in regular or predictable

order. Within each of these phases, however, a family will employ straregiesbased upon its own resources.

Another perspective of family coping phases is espoused by )IcCubbin

and Patterson (1983) in the FAAR model. The authors emphasize [hree phases

of resistance, restructuring, and consoiidation during which lamrlies empioyvarious adaptive coping strategies. It is presumed that [he restructuringphase is preceded by the resistance stage. However. families may not proceedlinearly from crisis to adaptalion. A family might become stuck aiong theway or follow a cyclical path as they work through lhe siruation.

This awareness of the cyclical nature of the coping process necessarily

assumes a process over time. Whereas some stressfui situations may be short-

term, other situations necessitate a family coping over long periods of time as

in the case of long-term illness, dual careers, or loss of famlly member.

Family coping strategies employed in year one may be the same or vary

dramatically from strategies employed in year ten. Studies of coping

November, 1987 FAMILY SCIENCE REVIEW 29

strat€gies employed by families of prisoners (Lowenstein, l9E4) reveal the age

of children ln ttre family and the length of time since incarc'eration are

critical factors in the choice of coping strategies employed by the families.

The dynamic aspect of life-cycle characteristics contributes lo the necessity

of adapting coping strategies to the currenl situation'

This discussion of the processual na[ure of coping heretofore has focused

on the sequential nature of family coping efforts. However, it is also

necessary to consider the fact that families face multiple stressors

"or,"rrr"r,tly at all three levels of flamily relarionships. -

For example, whaL

coping strategies must be employed by a family with a chronically il l child or

with marital conflict while facing economic diffrculties? What resources will

a family rely upon in the midst of such multiple crises? Family coping

,r""""*.iily must be viewed as a process of continually managing and

attempting to balance internal and external demands'

In light of this state of continual change, families are experiencing new

demands and opportunities tha[ mus[ b€ handled on a continual basis.

However, most of our phase models assume an inirially stable family whose

normal family functioning is interrupted by some new event or stressor and,

after a perioi of coping, reorganizes itself in some new stable state. This

upprou"h is stressoi oi situaCion specific and does not address the on-going

pro."*. of daily adjustmenbs. A challenge for family scientists will be to

incorporate the dynamics of family interaction into their models, recognizing

not only daily changes but that families may be facing multiple stressors

simultaneously.

Functions of Coping

In clarifying the concepb of family coping, i[ is necessary to understand

the purposes coping strategies serve. McCubbin and his colleagues (1980)

specified four functions of family coping as:

(1) reducing the vulnerability of the family to the stressor;(2) strengthening or maintaining family system characteristics;(3) reducing or eliminating stressor events and their hardships; and

(4) altering the environment by changing social circumstances.

Coping efforts also may be directed at eliminating or reducing demands,

redefining demands so as to make them more manageable, managing the

tension itri"tt is felt as a result of experiencing demands, and/or increasing

resources for dealing with demands (Pearlin & Schooler, 1978)' In addition t<r

increasing resources", a family may focus i|s efforts on avoiding the erosion of

individual or family ,*"o,rr"ur, so that through the coping process mat'erial

resources are not drained, bonds among family members are maintained, and

that the family's ability to respond to subsequent s[ressors has not been

reduced.

These efforts support the distinction between coping lhat is direcfed aC

managing or alterin; the problem causing the distress (problem-focused

coping) and co1problem (emoti

emotion-focusedbeen an apprauchallenging en'more probablechange.

I t shouldinfluence eachimpede each orresearch andapproaches toapproach, to tfocused, should

As noted ,such as dual caNeedle and WintergeneraLion;Martin and At"contexts are m(perspectives. tstudying specil'islyles may be ir

Coping Resourc'

Resourcesand necessaril;family unit, ardeveloped andresources tharranging from nr

Individu:r.lneed can rnclanalytical skil l :review of indivrr

Family sycan include cochange its po\response to srluMcCubbin, 198problem-solv ingproblem solvinlresources of thrdetermine che

30 FAMILY SCIENCE REVIEW November, 1987 Novetnber, l98l

coping) and coping that is directed at regulating emotional response to theproblem (emotion-focused coping) (Folkman & Lazarus, 1980). In general,emotion-focused forms of coping are more likely to occur when there hasbeen an appraisal that nothing can be done to modify harmful, threatening, orchallenging environment conditions. Problem-focused forms of coping aremore probable when such conditions are appraised as being amenable tochange.

It should be noted bhat problem-focused and emotion-focused copinginfluence each other throughoub a stressful encounter and can facilitate orimpede each obher. Klein (1983) has spoken of'Lhe need to integrate bheresearch and theory of stress, crisis, and coping and problem-solvingapproaches to gain greaber insight into family coping variables. Thisapproach, to view the functions of coping both as problem- and emotion-focused, should aid in the integration of the two bodies of research.

As noLed above, coping functions have been assessed in specific contextssuch as dual career families (Skinner, 1982), adolescent health risk (McCubbin,Needle and Wilson, 1985), families of prisoners (Lowenstein, 1984), andintergenerational transfer of the family farm (Russel, Griffin, Flinchbough,Martin and Atilano, 1985). Coping behaviors and strategies within specificcont€xts are more situation speciFrc than those derived from larger theoreticalperspectives. As we gain greater insight into the functions coping serves bystudying specific family life events, however, broader trans-situational copingstyles may be induced, thus enhancing theory-building efforts.

Coping Resources

Resources are part of a family's capabilities Lo meet or reduce demandsand necessarily include existing characteristics of individual members, thefamily unit, and the community as well as expanded resources that aredeveloped and strengthened in response to stressor demands. It is theseresources that a family draws upon to meet the demands of life eventsranging from normal to catastrophic.

Individual coping resources which the family may rely upon in times ofneed can include characleristics such as self-esteem. intellectual andanalytical skills, and interpersonal and other social skills. For a thoroughreview of individual coping resources consult Menaghan (1983).

Family system resources, or Lhe internal attributes of the family unib,can include cohesion (emotional bonding), adaptability (family's ability tochange its power structure, role relationships, and relationship rules inresponse to situational and developmental stress), and communication (Olson &McCubbin, 1982). Klein and Hill (1979) emphasized that homogeneity ofproblem-solving competencies and the extent to which particular and over-allproblem solving skills are evenly distributed among family members areresources of the family. Additionally, the financial resources of a family willdetermine the options available to a family to obtain services in the

Novernber. 1987 FAMILY SCIENCE REVIEW QI

mitigation of thewere quite willing

stress. Hoimstrom (1972) reported that dual-carCr coupies

[o use money to resolve overioad sLrain.

Recent studies have been directed at the identification of, famlly-level

interpersonal skills. Patterson and \icCubbin 198{ ' have noted the

impoirance of the psychoiogicai resource of androgl'n1- 'gender onent:riion

characterized by both high masculine and high femirune auributes'3s trI1

intervening factor in rhe development and use of e broader oopl4g repertoire'

In his stuJy of the coping patterns of prisoner's femrlies in lsrael. I owenstein

(1984) identified division of labor as a key resource in the family-

Community resources or social support c:rn include p€ople or instltutlons

that fhe famiiy can lurn to in rimes of need or a support rpr*'ork :n rvrlich

the flamily is cared for, valued, and love,-r Piiisuk & Parks- 1933'. Sociei

support has elicited much research lately -\lcCubbin. Cauble. et 'rl" l '3t2' to

deiermine the extent that families rel.v* upon estended femrll- s-\'stems'

community support groups, church, and other social networks dunng times of

StTESS.

Identif ication of key famiiy coping resources is the Frrst step in

understanding rhe function of such resources in the coping process'

Attention has recently been directed towards their role rn buffering the

impact of social stressors (Whearon, 1985r. [n ther rec'ent stucil- of the

Double ABCX model, Lavee, NlcCubbin, and Patterson' l9E5r found that fami iy

system resources (cohesion, adaptabil ity, and supportive communrcationr lffect

aiaptation directly whiie social support appeared to have a bulTelng role in

reducing post-crisis strain.

Research directed at integrabing individual and famrll '- level variables to

determine a family's coping resources has been limited to dat€. But ..;ust as

the B factor, resources, was found to be critical to a famrll"s adaotatron to

crisis (Hil l, 1949), so too shouid further understandir:g of a famrll"s coping

resources lead to further insight into the coping process'

Coping Strategies

Assuming that, coping resources has been suffrcientl;- dedt rvith. we now

shift to conceptual claiif ication of rhe concepl of coping strateg]-. -\ lthough

the term coping strategy appears in near ly al l l i terature on coping. rr is

seldom defined. Its meaning inciudes the approach taken b1' an rndivrdual or

fami ly to observe. exper ience. def ine. understend. end or ect in I 'esponse to : r

chalienging experience. Depending on the nature of the stressor. tr strategy

may be employed in the short rerm or may necessi tate implement.r t ton over a

long period of t ime. Coping s[rategles are often used s1'nony'mousiv ro refer

to iont"*t-specific actions. For clariry in the family l i terature' the authors

would suggest that the term coping strateg-Y be used to refer to the specific

rypes of i".por,.". made by a famiiy. eirher cognrtiveiy or behavioraily, to

demands.

Two recent l ines of research have shed light on family coping strategies.

McCubbin, L.rrwhich identifvsocial suppor:.and accept heiremployed bvcorresponding :report five e,join their studv rdistribution rimembersi . F,- ,adminisr lar ionmembers to iJ.d

To dare.context- relareriwithin the fa:r:ranalysis. Hovunderlying i;r:sysrcm are :n:underslooci in :,interdependentproblems nece.:

Due to :hethe coping stv.family in a r1'lFolkman , l9Slof the copine icoping st1'les orin employing ' remploys mukrcdifferent recurrstrategies .]restyles. Thesestudies of fr.mrin a con[extuai

Coping ETfectu-e

Tmnl in i t :n

depends on :hefamiiy's resour-{the impact of r r

The chorcein copine efec:inherentlv g,: 't".ineffectrve rri :extent to rvhrch

a9 FAMILY SCIENCE REVIEW November, 1987

McCubbin, Larsen, and Olson (1982) have developed their F'COPES Scaleswhich identify five coping strategies: reframing, passive appraisal, acquiringsocial support, seeking spiritual support, and mobilizing the family to acquireand accept help. Stetz, et al., (1986), from their study of coping slrategiesemployed by families with a chronicaily ill mother, identified srraLegiescorresponding to the five assessed in the F-COPES. They also, however.report five additional strategies. The predominanf coping stralegy identifiedin their study was alterations in househoid management (coordination of roles,distribution of aid between famiiy members, and effirmation of familymembers). Four other internal household family coping slrategies included:administrarion of sanctions, discretionary non-action. mobilizing familymembers to take aclion. and reducing invoivemenr in acriviries.

To date, research on family coping strategies has been focused oncontext-reiated evenrs and lhe coping abilities of individuals and subsystemswithin rhe family. Ferv studies have identified the torai family as the unit ofanalysis. However, if one is to take a sys[ems approach (the paradigmunderlying family therapy) with the premise that the elements wirhin thesystem are interdependent, then an individuai family member can only beunderstood in the family conteKt tNlinuchin, 1985). Hence, if the individuai isinterdependent with other family members, individual problems become familyproblems necessiuating the invoivement of the encire family unit.

Due to the sparsity of longitudinal studies, we have much to learn aboutthe coping styles families empioy - rhat is, the strategies employed by thefamily in a typical. habitual manner in approaching problems. Lazarus andFolkman (1984) suggest rhab complexity and flexibility are two formal aspectsof the coping process lo be considered as dimensions on which to examinecoping styles over many encounlers. Hence, does a family have a simple styiein employing only one strategy or does it have a complex style in lha6 itemploys multiple strategies? And/or, does a family tailor its strategies atdifferent recurrences of the same event (flexibility)? Perhaps family copingstrategies are so flexible and compiex Lo preciude the ciassification inlostyles. These questions can only be answered by the results of longrtudinalstudies of family coping strategies in differenr crisis situations over time orin a contextual model as advocated by Walker (1985).

Coping Effectiueness

Implicit in family coping is the notion of effectiveness. Effective copingdepends on the relationships between the demands of the situation and afamily's resources and on the family's appraisai and coping efforts to resoivethe impact of the demands.

The choice of coping strategy has been identified as an important factorin coping effectiveness (Pearlin & Schooler, 1978). Coping strategies are no[inherenrly good or bad. A s[rateg:y effective in one situarion can beineffective in another. The effectiveness of the stralegy depends on theextenl to which it is appropriate [o the situation's demands.

November, 1987 FAMILY SCIENCE REVIEW DO

10. Lack c11. Lack cEffectiveness cannot be based solely on the implementation of coping

strategies. Even though coping is normally vier+'ed :fs 3 s€t of constructive

efforts designed to protect the famiiy. there mav be seconciarl' efTects or

costs of coping. As Cohen. Evans, Stokols and Krantz ,l9i{ir mte. rhere ma1-

be a cumuiative fatigue effect u'hen conrinual coptng cftrtr drarn co€nitive

energies. There also may be an overgeneralization of a o;ing strategl' rvhen

the strategy continues to be emplol*ed even rn inapprogure sltustions. In

addition, coping side effecrs may occur r,r'hen coprng bcberbrs r*'hich *'ere

successful in amelioratine rhe effects of the stressor arc &*rrmental rn otherways.

A recent srudy by NlcCubbin and his .tssocratsi .1965' of :,dolescenthealth risk behaviors pointed to rhe porcntralll' dysfictinal ailture of even

constructive and wellness-promoting coping strategreg -ldohscents' use ofventilation iexpressing' frustration. 1'ell ing. comPLaidqg to other iemiiy

members) rvas positively correlared in their use oi cigareues. eicohoi. and

drugs. Thus rhese strategies employ'ed b1' the adolsccots ma1' be effeclivefrom their perspec[ive but the rest of the family rrll probabll' view the

substance use as an ineffecbive strategy rvhrch becog a sLressor for the

family as a whole.

In the problem-solving l iterature, the key depencient variable is

"problem-solving effectiveness" rvhich is the abil ity of the famrll ' to soive it 'sproblems ef fecr ively (Klein and Hi l l , 1979). Kletn r l983t suggests a new

dependent variable in studies of family coping m4hc be labeled "coping

effectiveness" with cautions that the processua-l nature of coprng should not

be equated with mastery. Loss of l i fe. "acLs of fu'. and ag:ng are allnormal l i fe situations which cannol be overcome in a problem-solving

framework. Effective coping under these difficulties is that whrch allows afamily lo endure, accept, or ignore wha! cannot be changed.

A workable approach lo the assessment of famill ' coping efTectivenessmay lie in the differentiation between functronal and d:;sfunctional methodsby which families cope. Figiey (1983) sets forth rhe follos'rng l l universalcharac[eristics of such differentiation:

1" Abil ity to identify the stressor;2. Viewing the situation as a family problem, rather lhan

merely a probiem of one or two of i ts members:3. Adopt ing a solul ion-or iented approach to the problem.

rather than simply blaming;1. Showing toierance for other famiiy members:5. Clear expression of commitment to and affeclton for

other famiiy members:6. Open and clear communicat ion among members:7. Evidence of high family cohesron;8. Evidence of considerable role flexibil iry:9. Appropriate uti l izacion of resources insrde and outside

the family;

Further studiescharacteristics :process of copine

Addit ionel l 'effectiveness cimembers. -\nstrategy, base,lfamily 's resour. ,of a family 's coo

What thenmaster, resoive.resources ano :iby cognitive reamultidimension.rthrough phases.

Family' corproblem-focuseddetermined in oand social suppo

Effective csituation and ebetween these :insight into a ier

Famill- meof an interact l rproblem-focusecin response to :r

The ma-rorissue-specific .

analysis. Thrs :crit ical purDosestrategles. ;1ncelements necessgroup.

As rve leerwe wi l l be bettefamily member,

November. l93iQ,,1 FAMILY SCIE\CE REVIE\! \ovember, 1987

10. Lack of overt or covert physical violence; and11. Lack of substance abuse 1p. 18) '

Further studies of famiiy coping should assess lhe interrelationships of these

characteristics and [heir contribution to rhe flamily's coping straregies and

process of coping.

Additionally, studies should evaluate the family's perception of the

effectiveness of the coping surategies employed both by the group and by its

members. An objective measure of the appropriateness of the employed

strateg:y, based upon the fltt between the demands on the family and the

familyls resources. could lead to a greater understanding of the effectiveness

of a family 's coping stretegies.

SUMIVTARY

What chen is family coping? It is the effort of the family system to

master, resolve, tolerate, or reduce demands that tax or exceed the family's

resources and the strategies employed. It is a process continuall-"- mediated

by cognitive reappraisals and behavioral effort to balance stressors. Coping is

muitiJimensional and necessitates the emplo-v-ment of various stages of events,

through phases. end over time.

Family coping serves multiple functions, bub of particuiar import are

problem-focused and emorion-focused coping. The way a family copes is

determined in part by its resources which include individuai, family system,

and social suPPort resources.

Effective coping depends on the relarionships among the demands of a

situation and a family's resources and the family's efforts to bridge any gap

berween these two. Further clarificacion of coping effectiveness should yield

insight inco a family's coping styles.

Family members respond to slressors not only as individuals but as part

of an interactive network. Coordination of family members' emotion- and

probiem-focused effort is required if the entire family is to cope effectively

in response lo lhe stressor.

The majority of family-related coping studies have used situation- or

issue-specific approaches and focused on the individual as the unit of

anaiysis. This may appear narrow and iimiting, but this research has served a

criticai purpose in Jefining role palterns, common coping resources and

strategies, and emphasizing the processual nature of coping. These are ail

eiements necessary to further lhe understanding of the family's coping as a

group.

As we learn more about rhe coping of individuals and famiiy subgroups,

we will be beLter pr.epared to sel up empiricai studies to tesi the dynamics of

family members rvithin the group and the effect that' has on the famiiy as a

November, 1987 FA}IILY SCIENCE REVIEW 35

whole reacting with the environment. At the family level, research is called

for which demonstrates that lhe properties ascribed to families, such as their

degree of integration or orientation towards the environmeni' are emergen[

properties of the group.

Aswegaingreater insight intofami lycopingresources,hopeful lyadditional insights rlgarding the coping strategies families emplo-"- wii l assist

therapists, policy -u'kur.

ind the family itself. Just as recent srudies of

adolescentcopingStrategies(} tcCubbinetel '1985)haverevealedthatintervention may be mo.! benefici:,r l al the famiiy level rather than rhrough

drugprograms'50should|urtherstudiesoffami l ; -strategiesprovideir1ro"r*utio" as to the most bene{jcial approach to heiping famiiies cope'

Although most studies have focused on family coping as perceived by tl-re

parents, recen[ studies have focused on adolescent coping .,vithin families.

However, to date, there appears to be l itt le research irs to lhe contribution ot

younger chiidren to rhe coping process' other than as rhe focus of the

srressor event ! i .e. d isabled.r t i la uv Schi l l ing et a l . . 1984: chi ld wi th cancer

by Barbar in e[ a l . , 1985).

studies of parental coping have uti l ized coping indexes thar requit e

adults to complete inrrentoiies of coping strategies- they have employed

(NlcCubbin, Boss, Wi lson, and Dahl, 1979: Skinner & } IcCubbin, 1981) ' Whac

measures can be developed to assess a child's conlribution to a famtiy's

coplng resources and strategies implemented? Is a child's coping abil ity an

essential factor in a family's coping abil ity or are they merely carried by the

iu_nv no*t since adolescent coping has been shown to be of importance to

a family,s coping abil ity, a[ whaL point does a child's coping ebil ity affect the

flamily,s coping "nii i tyi

What roie does the famiiy play in teaching the chiid

effective coping strategiesl These are key questions that wil l need lo be

addressed in future family studies'

Since families are ever-changing, the prospect of determining ke1' coprng

resources and styles seems quirc ro.midabie. To date, srudies have indicated

rhatcopingStrategiesappeartobesi tuat ionspeci f ic . Inasearchforunderstandlng of f imily-level coping, it appears impos-sible to study every

si tuat ionafami ly-uyfu""SoaStohavespeci f ic informat iontoassistafamily in response [o each stressor' We must continue [o search for

commonalit ies in coping resources and strategies to further assist famiiies'

Evenmoreimportanl thanident i fy inguniversalorcommonsequencesofcoping, however, is rrre need for information about rvhether some coplng

stracegies are more effective rhan others in given types of families, for given

types of stress. at certain times' and under given conditions'

REFERENCES

American Psychological Association. (1982). Thesq.urus of psychological index

terms, tiird. edition lVashington D'C': Author'

Bandura, A. 'Hal l .

Barbarin. O.. Ifuncrionlnand the F

Boss, P.. \ IcCwife's coFamil P'

Burr, W. R.Nerv Yor-,

Cohen, S.. Er:enu iro nrtn ,

Figley, C. R.NIcC ubbuCatastros

Folkman. S..aged con2 19-239.

Haan, N. l iorgonuct

Haan, N. l3Goldbergclinical c

Hi l l , R. t . l9{9

Holmstrom. L

Kessler, R..psychop:Rosenrve572t. P:

Klein, D. \1.NIcCubo:the f'amt'

Kiein, D. \1.effectrveContempThe Fre'

JO FAMILY SCIENCE REVIEW November, 1987 November, l9Sl

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice

Hall.

Barbarin, o., Hughes, D., and chesler, M. (1985). stress, coping and marital

functioning among parents of children with cancer. Journal of Marriage

and the FamilY, 17,473'180.

Boss, P., McCubbin, H. I . , and Lester, G. ( i979). The corporate execut ive

wife's coping patterns in response to routine husband-father absence.

Family Process, 18, 79-86'

Burr, W. R. (1973). Theory construction and the sociology of' the famil-v.New York: WileY.

Cohen, S., Evans, G., Stokois, D., and Krlniz, D. i1986). Behauior, heaLth and

enuironmental stress. New York: Pienum Press'

Figley, c. R. (1983). coping wirh cauastrophe. In C. R. Figiey and H. I .

McCubbin (Eds.), Srress and the family (Vol. II): Coping tuith

Catastrophe (pp. 3'20). Springfield, IL: Charles G' Thomas'

Folkman. S., and Lazarus, R. S' (1980). An anaiysis of coping in a middle-

aged community sample" Journal of Health and sociaL Behauior, 21,

219-239.

Haan, N. (.1977). Coping and defending: Processes of self-enuironmentaL

organization New York: Academic Press'

Haan, N. (1982). The assessment of coping, defense, and stress' In L.

Goldberger and S. BrezniLz (Eds.), Hqndbooh of stress: Theoretical ond

clinical aspects (pp.254-269). New York: The Free Press'

Hill, R. (1949). Families under sfress. New York: Harper & Row'

Holmsbrom , L. (1972). The two career family. Cambridge: Schenkman.

Kessler, R., Price. R., and Wortman, C. ( 1985). Social factors in

psychoparhology: slress' social support and coping process' In NI'

Rosenweig and L. Porter (Eds.), Annual reuiew of psychoLogy tpp.531'

572). PaIo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews, Inc.

Klein, D. NI. (1983). Famiiy problem solving and family stress' In H. I .

NlcCubbin. lvl. B. Sussman. and J. lI. Patterson (Eds'), Social stress and

the family (pp. 85-112). New York: The Hayworth Press' Inc'

Klein, D. X{. and Hiil, R' (1979). Determinants of family problem soiving

effecriveness. In W. Burr, R. HiiI, F. Ny", and I. Reiss (Eds.l,

Contemporary theories about the family tVol 1) tpp. '193-5'18t. New York:

The Free Press'

November, 1987 FAMILY SCIENCE REVIEW 1,7

Lavee, Y., NfcCubbin, H' I', and Patterson' J' M' (1985)' The double ABCX

model of family *,",., and adaptation: an empirical test by anaiysis of

structurai "qt,*tio,,.

with latent variables. Journal of tr[arriage and the

FamilY, 47, 8LL'825'

Lazarus, R. S. and Folkman, S' (1984)' Sfress' appraisal' and coping' New

York: SPringer'

Lazarus,R.S.endLaunier,R.(1978) 'stress.reiated|ransact ionsbelrveenperson and .,,"i 'onrn""t' In L' A' Pervin and rv'I' Lewis tEds')''Perspectiue in interactionaL psychology' New York: Plenum'

Lowens[ein. A. ( 1984). Coping with stress: the case of pr isoners' wives'

Journal of Matiage and the FamiLy''46' 699'708'

NlcCubbin, H. [ . , Boss, P' ' Wi lson' L ' ' and Dahl ' B' (1979) ' Family coping

inuentory. St. Paul, )[N: University of Nlinnesota'

McCubbin,H.I . ,Cauble,A.E.,andPatterson.J.NI.(Eds.) . (1982).Familystress, coping, and socicll support' Springfield' IL: Charies C' Thomas'

McCubbin, H. I . , Joy, C' B' , Cauble' A' E' ' Comeau' J ' K" Patterson' J ' l I ' '

andNeedle,R.H-11980) 'Familystressandcoping:adecadereview'Journal of Marriage and the Famib; ' 42 ' 855-87I'

McCubbin, H. I . , Larsen, A' S' ant l Olson' D' H' (1982) ' Family coping

sLrategies. In H' I ' McCubbi ' r ' A' S' Larsen' and D' H' Olson (Eds')

Famity inu", io, : t" l (pp" 101- :20) ' St ' Paul ' MN: Universi ty of

Minnesota, FamilY Social Science'

McCubbin,H.I . ,Needle,R'H' ,andWilson'M'(1985) 'Adolescentheal thr iskbehaviors: r"*irv.' '*ss and adolescent coping as critical factors. FamiLl,

Relations, 34, 5L'62'

McCubbin, H. I . and Pal lerson, J. M. (1983). The famiiy stress,procu.=.=' ' -h:

doubleABCXmodelofadjustmenbandadap|at ion. InH.I .NlcCubbin 'NI.B. Sussman. and J. M. Patterson (Eds.) , Social stress and the family tpp.

7'38). New York: The Hayworth Press' Inc'

} Ienaghan,E.(1983). Indiv iduaicopingeffortandfamrlystudies:conceptualand merhod"ilgi.uiirr""r. rn n. i NIcCubbin, ,"vI. B. Sussman and J. NI'

Patterson tEds.), Social stress and the family (pp' 113-136) ' New York:

The HaYworth Press' Inc'

Minuchin,P.(1985).Famil iesandindiv idualdevelopment:provocat ionsfromthe field of famity therapy' Chitd Deuetopment' 56' 289'302'

Moos, R. H.. BresourcesHandboohYork The

Olson, D. H.. rfamil l ' s1:InH. i . lStress. CitC. Thorne.

Patterson. 'J . :Journci t '

Pearlin. L.. :.r:HeoLth cn"

Pilisuk, \I. :n,jI . \ lcCuobthe f'an:i'reseorc.i,

Reiss, D. ano tproposairesponses

Russel, C.. Gr:Coping strfarm. Ru

Schilling, R. F.suppor!Relat ions.

Skinner. D. l1H. I . \ ICsfress, -'c;C. Thornt

Stetz, K. \1. . Iano cnror

Ventura. J. \parents \r875.

Voydanoff. P\ IcC ubc:r(pp. to--

aq FAMILY SCIENCE REVIEW November, I987 November, l3Sl

Moos, R. H., Bill ings, A. G. (1982). Conceptualizing and measuring copingresources and processes. In L. Goldberger and S. Breznitz (Eds.),Handbooh of stress: theoreticol and clinical aspects (pp. 212-230). NewYork The Free Press.

Olson, D. H., and NlcCubbin, H. I . (1982). Circumplex model of mari tal andfamily systems, V: application to family slress and crisis intervenlion.In H. i. l lcCubbin, A. E. Cauble, and J. NI. Patterson (.Eds.), FamilyStress. Coping, and Socia.l Support, (pp. a8-68). Springfield, IL: CharlesC. Thomas.

Patterson, J. \ I . and McCubbin, H. I . i l98' l ) . Gender roles and coping.Journal of lIarriage and the FamiLy.46, 95- 104.

Pearl in, L. , and Schooler, C. (1978). The structure of coping. Jou,rnal ofHealth and Social Behauior, 19,2-21.

Pi l isuk, NI. and Parks, S. H. f1981). Social support and family stress. In H.I. McCubbin, M. B. Sussman, and J. II. Patterson (Eds.), Social stress andthe family: Aduances and deuelopments in family stress theory andresearch, (pp. 137-156). New York: Haworth.

Reiss, D. and Oliveri, M. E. (1980). Family paradigm and family coping: aproposal for linking the family's intrinsic adaptive capacities io itsresponses m stress. Family Relattons,29, 131-444.

Russel, C., Gri f f in, C., Fl inchbaugh, C. Mart in, M., and At i lano, R. (1985).

Coping strategies associated with intergenerational transfer of rhe familyfarm. Rural SocioLogy, 50, 361'376.

Schi l l ing, R.F., Gi lchr ist , L. D., and Schinke, S. P. (1984). Coping and socialsupport in families of developmentally disabled children. FamilyRelat ions, 33, 3I7 -327.

Skinner, D. (1982). Stressors and coping patt€rns of dual-career families. InH. I. McCubbin, A. E. McCauble, and J. \{. Patterson (Eds.)' Familystress, coping, and social support (pp. i36-150)" Springfield, IL: ChariesC. Thomas.

Stetz. K. N{., Lewis, F. NI., and Primono, J. (1986). Family coping strat'egiesand chronic i l lness in the mother. Family ReLat ions, 35, 515'522.

Ventura, J. N. and Boss, P. (1983). The family coping inventory appl ied toparents with new babies. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 15. 867'875.

Voydanoll, p. i1983). Coping trith unemp\oyment. \n C. R. Sig\ey and \1. \.N,tcCubbin 1Eds.), Siress and the lamily (Vol. II): Coping uith catastrophe(pp. 90-102). Springf ield. IL: Charles G' Thomas.

November, 1987 FANTILY SCIENCE REVIEW eo

Walker, A. (1985). Reconceptualizing family stress' Journal oi llsr?iage and

the FamilY, 47, 827-837 '

Webster,sThirdNewlnternat ionalDict ionaryoftheEngl ishl .anguage.(1971). Springfield' rv-IS: G & C Nlerriam'

wheaton, B. ( 1985). Nlodels for the srress'buffering functrons 'rf coping

resources. Journal of Heolth and Science' 26' 352'36-t'

.t0 FAIVI iLY SCIENCE REVIEW \ovember, 1987

Spe,Fa

Disttnc!:made.srr6stcr :unsub .r t ttaou. IFamii . ' , .norm :rtime.

Major ton famill- :Neverthelessbounds of : 'eA varietl ' ,, i

as to rvhllt l !the discussiosay that rheview might n

Whrle rof research.ones in par:particular l:r 'which the lthai such anexplanat ions.support therr

Mainstrresearcher cand, if used :

* Er ik Fr lsrn,

prot 'essor oi I

Tempe.. \ r rzcr

Key words: S p