Chapter 3 Coping Religiosity And Suicide

8/2/2019 Chapter 3 Coping Religiosity And Suicide

1/33

Chapter 3: Coping Behavior, Religiosity & Suicide 141

Chapter 3

Coping Behavior, Religiosity andSuicide

Definitions of Coping

Coping is defined as constantly changing cognitive and behavioral efforts

to manage specific external and/or internal demands that are appraised as

taxing or exceeding the resources of the person to a stressful situation. It is

the effort to manage and overcome these demands and critical events that

pose a challenge, threat, harm, loss, or benefit to a person (Lazarus and

Folkman, 1984; Seiffge-Krenke, 1995)

Coping is also defined as a process by which an individual manages the

ever-changing environment. Coping may be seen as actions taken by persons

directed at confronting demands, solving problems, and/or altering and

managing stressors. Coping behavior is generally influenced by maturation

and cognitive development such as problem-solving ability, and

understanding peers and adults (Lewis & Brown, 2002).

Koch & Shepperd, (2004); Schlozman et al., (2004); Morling et al., (2006)

further stated that coping is perhaps best defined as a problem-solving

behavior that is intended to bring about relief, reward, quiescence, and

equilibrium. Nothing in this definition promises permanent resolution of

problems. It does imply a combination of knowing what the problems are

and how to go about reaching a correct direction that will help resolution.


2/33


Yet most approaches in coping research follow Folkman and Lazarus

(1980), who define coping as `the cognitive and behavioral efforts made to

master, tolerate, or reduce external and internal demands and conflicts

among them.'

The Stress Theory

Two concepts are central to any psychological stress theory: appraisal, i.e.,

individuals' evaluation of the significance of what is happening for their

well-being, and coping, i.e., individuals' efforts in thought and action to

manage specific demands (Lazarus, 1993).

Lazarus (1966) illustrated two basic forms of appraisal, primary and

secondary appraisal; these forms rely on different sources of information.

Primary appraisal concerns whether something of relevance to the

individual's well being occurs, whereas secondary appraisal concerns coping

options.

Within primary appraisal, three components are distinguished: goal

relevance describes the extent to which an encounter refers to issues about

which the person cares. Goal congruence defines the extent to which an

episode proceeds in accordance with personal goals. Type of ego-

involvement designates aspects of personal commitment such as self-

esteem, moral values, ego-ideal, or ego-identity.

Likewise, three secondary appraisal components are distinguished: blame or

credit results from an individual's appraisal of who is responsible for a

certain event. By coping potential Lazarus means a person's evaluation of


3/33


the prospects for generating certain behavioral or cognitive operations that

will positively influence a personally relevant encounter. Future

expectations refer to the appraisal of the further course of an encounter with

respect to goal congruence or incongruence.

Unlike approaches discussed so far, resource theories of stress are not

primarily concerned with factors that create stress, but with resources that

preserve well being in the face of stressful encounters. Several social and

personal constructs have been proposed, such as social support (Schwarzer

and Leppin 1991), sense of coherence (Antonovsky 1979), hardiness

(Kobasa 1979), self-efficacy (Bandura 1977), or optimism (Scheier and

Carver 1992). Whereas self-efficacy and optimism are single protective

factors, hardiness and sense of coherence represent tripartite approaches.

Hardiness is an amalgam of three components: internal control,

commitment, and a sense of challenge as opposed to threat. Similarly, sense

of coherence consists of believing that the world is meaningful, predictable,

and basically benevolent. Within the social support field, several types havebeen investigated, such as instrumental, informational, appraisal, and

emotional support

The recently offered conservation of resources (COR) theory (Hobfoll

1989, Hobfoll et al., 1996) assumes that stress occurs in any of three

contexts: when people experience loss of resources, when resources are

threatened, or when people invest their resources without subsequent gain.Four categories of resources are proposed: object resources (i.e., physical

objects such as home, clothing, or access to transportation), condition

resources (e.g., employment, personal relationships), personal resources


4/33


(e.g., skills or self-efficacy), and energy resources (means that facilitate the

attainment of other resources, for example, money, credit, or knowledge).

The Concept of CopingEarly conceptualizations of coping centered around the Transactional

Model for Stress Management, put first by Lazarus and colleagues in the

late 1960s (Lazarus, 1966), this conceptualization stressed the extent of

coping to which patients interact with their environment as a means of

attempting to manage the stress of illness. These interactions involve

appraisals of the current medical condition, with psychological and cultural

overlay that varies from patient to patient (Stern et al., 2008).

In the late 1970s a major new development in coping theory and research

occurred (Lazarus, 1993); in which the hierarchical view of coping with its

trait or style emphasis was abandoned in the favor of treating coping as a

process. The term coping is used whether the process is adaptive or non

adaptive, successful or non successful, consolidated or fluid and unstable.

Lazarus (1993) stated that the process of coping employed for the different

threats produced by cancer, or any other complex source of psychological

stress, whether disease-based or not, varies with the diverse adaptational

significance and requirements of these threats. Therefore, when studying

how the patient copes with this illness, it is necessary to specify the

particular threats of immediate concern to the patient and to treat them

separately rather than broadening the focus of attention to the overall illness.

Coping also changes from one time to another in any given stressful

encounter; this is an empirical statement of what means to talk about coping


5/33


as process. When stressful conditions are viewed by a person as refractory to

change, emotion focused coping predominates; while when they are

appraised as controllable by action, problem focused coping predominates

(Folkman and Lazarus 1980; Lazarus and Folkman1987).

The coping process approach assumes that coping is flexible, involves

active planning, and is responsive to environmental demands and personal

preferences. Thus coping should be conceptualized as a dynamic and

constantly changing process as stated by Ayers et al.,(1996) who further

added that both cognitions (e.g., the individuals appraisal of the situation)

and behaviors (e.g., what a person actually does) from a situation-specific

perspective should be considered.

The Lazarus (Lazarus 1991; Lazarus and Folkman 1984; Lazarus and

Launier, 1978) model outlined above represents a specific type of coping

theory. These theories may be classified according to two independent

parameters:

(a) trait-oriented versus state -oriented.

(b) microanalytic versus macroanalytic approaches (Krohne, 1996).

Trait-oriented and state-oriented research strategies have different

objectives: The trait-oriented (or dispositional) strategy aims at early

identification of individuals whose coping resources and tendencies are

inadequate for the demands of a specific stressful encounter. An early

identification of these persons will offer the opportunity for establishing aselection (or placement) procedure or a successful primary prevention

program. Research that is stateoriented, i.e., which centers around actual

coping, has a more general objective.


6/33


Microanalytic approaches focus on a large number of specific coping

strategies, whereas macroanalytic analysis operates at a higher level of

abstraction, thus concentrating on more fundamentalconstructs.

The distinction of the two basic functions of emotion-focused and problem-

focused coping proposed by Lazarus and Folkman (1984) represents a

macroanalytic state approach. While S. Freud's (1926) classic defense

mechanisms conception is an example of a state-oriented, macroanalytic

approach. Although Freud distinguished a multitude of defense mechanisms,

in the end, he related these mechanisms to two basic forms: repression and

intellectualization (Freud 1936). The trait-orientedcorrespondence of these

basic defenses is the personality dimension repressionsensitization (Byrne

1964; Eriksen, 1966).

Classification and Types of Coping Behavior

An overview of the perspectives of coping theorists shows that they have

generally categorized coping strategies under three groups: a) strategies

focused on resolving the problem; b) strategies used to alleviate the

emotions triggered by the situation; and c) strategies involving social

support (Snyder, 1999).

Folkman and Lazarus (1980); Taylor et al. (1998) went on to make an

important and now widely accepted distinction between two types of coping.

In one, problem focused; the person attempts to address directly the

problems that he is facing. In the second, emotion focused; the person tries to

dampen or minimize the emotional state itself, without addressing the

problem that elicited the state. Coping efforts may focus on altering ones

environment or emotions , the majority of individuals utilize both types of


7/33


strategies and adapt these strategies to fit specific stressful situations and

achieve successful resolutions (Aldwin & Brustrom, 1997)

Weiten and Lloyd (2006) added the appraisal-focused strategies to the above

2 strategies:

Appraisal-focused strategies occur when the person modifies the

way they think, for example: employing denial, or distancing oneself

from the problem. People may alter the way they think about a

problem by altering their goals and values, such as by seeing the

humour in a situation.

Problem-focused strategies are used by people who try to deal with

the cause of their problem. They do this by finding out information

on the problem and learning new skills to manage the problem.

Emotion-focused strategies involve releasing pent-up emotions,

distracting one-self, managing hostile feelings, turning to religion,

meditating, using systematic relaxation procedures, etc.

Moos and Schaefer (1984) helped better understanding of the previous three

coping categories each with three skills;

1. Appraisal-Focused Coping: These skills involve how we understand

the stressful situation

a) Logical analysis and mental preparation Breaking down anoverwhelming problem down into manageable parts, taking advantage

of past similar experiences, evaluating and rehearsing plausible "what-

if" scenarios


8/33


b) Cognitive redefinition Restructuring or re-framing the situation tofind something favorable

c) Cognitive avoidance or denial Denying or minimizing the severityof the situation

2. Problem-focused Coping: These skills involve doing something about

the problem itself

a) Seeking information and support Getting information about thesituation and evaluating any possible courses of action

b) Taking problem-solving actions Taking deliberate action to dealdirectly with the situation

c) Identifying alternative rewards Trying to replace any losses orsetbacks with new sources of satisfaction

3. Emotion-focused Coping: These skills involves what we do with our

reactions to the situation

a) Affective regulation Working to maintain hope and to controlemotions

b) Emotional discharge Expressing feelings and using humor to helpreduce strain

c)

Resigned acceptanceAccepting the situation for what it is, realizingthe circumstances cannot be altered and submitting to fate.

Typically, people use a mixture of all three types of coping, and coping

skills will usually change over time. All these methods can prove useful, but


9/33


some claim that those using problem-focused coping strategies will adjust

better to life (Taylor, 2006)

Apart from these three categories, theorists such as Billings and Moos

(1981), along with Pearlin and Schooler (1978), have constructed

alternative models by classifying the coping strategies in accordance with

the approach-avoidance dichotomy. At a more practical level, Frydenberg

and Lewis' (1993, 1996) model offers an assessment of coping strategies by

separating them into productive, nonproductive (Zeidner and Endler , 1996)

Endler and Parker (1990) additionally suggest avoidance-focused coping

as a category, which entails person-oriented or task-oriented strategies to

distract away from the stressor at hand. Others have described religious faith

and spiritual beliefs as a means of coping (Dervic et al., 2006; Walker and

Bishop, 2005;Hovey, 1999).

Folkman and lazarus (1985) used the 2 general dimensions of problem

focused and emotion focused coping as a conceptual guide to develop the

ways of coping checklist which include; Wishful thinking, detachement, self

blame, tension reduction, keeping to self emphasizing the positive, problem

focused and seeking social support,Parker & Endler (1996) added thatboth

types of coping are important, and, if used properly, can have extraordinarily

beneficial consequences for physical and mental health. Matud(2004)

found that men often prefer problem-focused coping, whereas women can

often tend towards an emotion-focused response. Problem-focused coping

mechanisms may allow an individual greater perceived control over their

problem, while emotion-focused coping may more often lead to a reduction


10/33


in perceived control. Certain individuals therefore feel that problem-focused

mechanisms represent a more effective means of coping.

An additional distinction is often made in the coping literature between

active and avoidant coping strategies (Holahan & Moos, 1997).

1-Active coping strategies: Are either behavioral or psychologicalresponses designed to change the nature of the stressor itself or how one

thinks about it.

2-Avoidant coping strategies: Lead people into activities (such asalcohol use) or mental states (such as withdrawal) that keep them

from directly addressing stressful events. Avoidance-oriented coping

has been conceptualized as involving person-oriented and/or task-

oriented responses (Endler & Parker, 1992). Strategies associated

with this approach include seeking out other people (social

diversion) or engaging in a substitute task (distraction) (Sandler et

al., 1997).

Frazier (2002)gives another illustration to the different types of coping:1. Active Coping (e.g., I take additional action to try to get rid of the

problem; I consult others who have had similar problems about

what they did)

2. Emotional Regulation (e.g., I talk to someone about how I feel; Ilearn to accept and live with it; I get upset and let my emotions

out)

3. Distancing(I seek Gods help; I refuse to believe it has happened;I turn to other activities to take my mind off things).

Gupta & Derevensky (2000) stated that positive coping processes

include the utilization of multiple problem and solution-focused


11/33


strategies that allow the individual to consider multiple options in

dealing with difficult problems.

Generally speaking, active coping strategies, whether behavioral or

emotional, are thought to be better ways to deal with stressful events, and

avoidant coping strategies appear to be a psychological risk factor or marker

for adverse responses to stressful life events.

Carver et al. (1989) found among ways which people respond to stress

behavioral disengagement; which is reducing one's effort to deal with the

stressor, even. Giving up the attempt to attain goals with which the stressor

is interfering. In theory, behavioral disengagement is most likely to occur

when people expect poor coping outcome. Mental disengagement is a

variation on behavioral disengagement, postulated to occur when conditions

prevent behavioral disengagement (Carver et al., 1983), which include using

activities to take one's mind off a problem (e.g. day dreaming, escaping

through sleep, watching T.V.).

Rumination or self-focused attention may be defined as a stable, emotion-

focused coping style that involves responding to problems by directing

attention internally toward negative feelings and thoughts. Ruminating about

problems includes both cognitive (self-focused cognitions) and affective

(increased emotional reactivity) elements (Broderick & Korteland, 2002)

While faulty coping processes may include the use of a high number of

emotion-focused responses to stressful situations that usually involve

avoidance, rumination, and negatively centered affective strategies (Gupta

& Derevensky, 2001). It is important to note that, although women are more

likely to ruminate than men, rumination is not an exclusively female


12/33


behavior. Similarly, avoiding or distracting oneself from problems is not a

coping strategy unique to males (Tavris, 1999).

Function of Coping

Lazarus (1999); Lazarus (1983) documented the unsuspected benefits of

the coping process. He demonstrated experimentally that patients who

engage in forms of denial (for example, refusing to believe that a serious

medical problem exists or to accept that the problem is as severe as it, in

fact, is) recover better and more quickly than patients who do not engage in

such denial. Lazarus thus came to believe, contrary to orthodox wisdom, that

under certain conditions, false beliefs can have very beneficial consequences

to one's health and well-being.The study on the benefits of denial has now

been replicated by others, and its findings are taken into consideration in

health psychology and psychosomatic medicine.

Pearlin and Schooler (l978) stated that coping is seen as having three main

(protective) functions: Management of the problem causing the distress

through elimination or modification of the conditions giving rise to it,

alteration of (perceptually controlling) the meaning of the experience so as

to neutralize its problematic character and, regulation of the emotional

distress produced by the problem. These functions have been supported and

are widely recognized by others (Mechanic, 1977; Kahn et al., 1964;

Folkman and Lazarus, 1980).

Hamburg et al. (1967) stated that the goals of Effective Coping Behavior

are: To keep distress within manageable limits, to maintain a sense of

personal worth, to restore relations with significant other people, to increase


13/33


the likelihood of working out a personally valued and socially acceptable

situation.

Folkman and Lazarus(1988) assessed subjects' emotional state at the

beginning and end of a number of stressful encounters, focusing on amount

and direction of change as a function of the coping strategy reported. Some

coping strategies, such as planful problem solving and positive reappraisal

were associated with changes in emotion from negative to less negative or

positive while other coping strategies such as confrontive coping and

distancing, correlated with emotional changes in the opposite direction that

is toward more distress (Haan, 1969).

Individuals vary in the extent to which they use humor to cope with

stressful situations. Those with greater tendencies to cope with humor report

greater daily positive mood (Dillon et al., 19851986;Lefcourt, 2001).

Consequently, in response to stress, those with greater propensities to cope

with humor show increases in levels of immunoglobulin A (S-IgA), a vital

immune system protein.

Ineffective Coping

Ineffective coping is an inability to for a valid appraisal of stressors,

inadequate choices of practiced responses, and/or inability to use available

resources(Gordon, 2002)

House (2009) stated that coping responses may be ineffective. There are few

rules about what makes effective coping. In general, a broad and flexible

repertoire is desirable, with a strong element of active problem focused

techniques. However not all illnesses, nor all aspects of a particular illness,
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4055243http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4055243http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4055243http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4055243http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1201429/#R66http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1201429/#R66http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4055243


14/33


are likely to be amenable to problem-focused coping. Probably the most

effective coping is matched to the situation. That is, the coping matches the

demands, so that heavy reliance is not placed on problem-focused coping

when little in the situation can change, nor excessive use made of emotion-

focused coping when active involvement in illness management is needed.

Sharpe and Curran (2006) stated that demands of the situation may be

overwhelming. The news that one has a terminal illness takes time to

assimilate-to understand all its meanings, grasp all the threats and losses

involved. While that process of appraisal is going on, it is difficult to

marshal resources and use them effectively. This explains, in part, why

mood disorder is more commonly associated with acute than chronic illness.Also, resources may be inadequate or missing. One problem associated

with physical illness is that it may impair personal resources as a primary

effect of the disease process-most importantly when the illness has effects on

the central nervous system by virtue of the direct involvement of the brain or

through the neurological effects of systemic disturbance.

A common problem of failure to match coping to the situation is found in

patients with chronic illness, who are responding to their circumstances as if

they none the less have an acute illness. In acute illness, problem-focused

coping often involves seeking reversal or even cure of the illness process,

while emotion focused coping involves dealing with the anxiety of

uncertainty, or grieving if the prognosis is clearly poor. On the other hand, in

chronic illness, problem-focused coping involves symptom management and

maximizing function, while emotion-focused coping requires a degree of

acceptance. (House, 1988)


15/33


Mental Illness and Coping

Schomerus and Angermeyer (2008) stated that many people suffering from

serious mental illness do not seek appropriate medical help. The stigma ofmental illness has often been considered a potential cause for reluctance in

seeking help; intervention studies show that destigmatisation may lead to

increased readiness to seek professional help and thus a better coping.

Recent research conducted by Wu et al.(2010) has found that people with

psychiatric disabilities tended to utilize passive and emotional-focused

strategies to cope with their illness ; analysis of survey data found the sense

of helplessness and the overall illness adaptation significantly impact

negative emotion coping utilization. Those who felt highly impact by the

illness, more sense of helplessness, less actively managing their illness, and

more social support availability were more likely to use positive emotion as

a coping strategy.

Broderick & Korteland (2002) stated that ruminative strategies including

isolating oneself to think out a problem, writing in a diary about how sad one

feels, or talking repetitively about a negative experience with the purpose of

gaining increased personal insight; may actually make the depression worse.

Broderick & Korteland (2002) have found that the use of distraction, that

is, the deliberate focusing on neutral or pleasant thoughts or engaging in

activities that divert attention in more positive directions, can attenuate

depressive episodes


16/33


Both depressed suicide attempters and depressed individuals without a

suicide attempt displayed higher levels of hopelessness and poorer problem

solving abilityin a study conducted byRoskar et al. (2007)

Kolla et al. (2008) found that borderline personality disorder as a chronic

psychiatric condition is characterized by a pervasive pattern of instability in

affect regulation and impulse control. These maladaptive coping strategies

predispose these individuals to suicidal behavior.

A recent study was conducted by Cukrowicz et al. (2008) the purpose of

this study was to examine coping styles and thought suppression as

predictors of a suicide risk in a sample of depressed older adults with co-

occurring personality disorders. Based on the extant literature, it was

hypothesized that maladaptive coping (i.e. emotional and avoidance coping)

and chronic thought suppression would significantly predict suicide risk.

The results of this study indicated that elevated emotional coping and

thought suppression were associated with increased suicide risk. Contrary to

hypotheses, lower avoidance coping was associated with increased risk.

Coping style of suppression was significantly and positively related to

suicide risk, as were several other coping styles (Josepho and Plutchik

,1994).Thus, treatments that focus on decreasing emotional coping and

chronic thought suppression may result in decreased suicidal ideation and

hopelessness for older adults with depression and Axis II pathology

(Cukrowicz et al., 2008)

Also there is consistent evidence that dimensions of active coping that

include problem-solving in a stressful situation is related to lower mental

health and substance use problems (Sandler et al., 1997). Also individuals


17/33


with substance abuse problems demonstrate an avoidance-oriented coping

style that often focuses on strategies such as daydreaming, helplessness,

distraction, and diversion (Winters & Anderson, 2000).

The robust and isolated representation of suicidal ideas and attempts

associated with maladaptive coping strategies with younger age confirms the

specificity of coping qualities, and also confirms the association of

depression with dysfunctional attitudes and with maladaptive coping

distinctly, but risky problem solving, maladaptive coping and dysfunctional

attitudes seem to characterize different groups of depressive syndromes with

only a moderate overlap (Csorba et al., 2007).

Roskar et al. (2007) stated that next to feelings of hopelessness, certain

cognitive features such as problem solving deficiency, attentional bias and

reduced future positive thinking are involved in the development and

maintenance of suicidal behavior.

Horesh et al. (2007) added that suicidal patients were significantly lesslikely to use the coping styles of minimization and mapping. They were

unable to de-emphasize the importance of a perceived problem or source of

stress. They also lacked the ability to obtain new information required to

resolve stressful life events. Four coping styles correlated negatively with

the suicide risk (minimization, replacement, mapping and reversal), while

another three (suppression, blame and substitution) correlated positively,

also female who used emotion-focused coping were more likely to

experience suicidal ideations (Edwards and Holden, 2001)

In a study conducted by Gould et al. (2004); Dinya et al. (2009) to

identify youths' attitudes about coping and help-seeking strategies for


18/33


suicidal ideation and behavior; it was found that they use maladaptive

coping strategies in response to depression and suicidal thoughts and

behaviors such as avoidance and approach coping responses respectively.

Dinya et al. (2009) further added that future research is needed to identify

possible variation in the coping strategies among different adolescent

suicidal patients.

Gonzalez et al. (2009) stated that drinking to cope was a significant

intervening variable in the relationships between suicidal ideation and

alcohol consumption, heavy episodic drinking, and alcohol problems, even

while controlling for depression. These results suggest that the relationship

between suicidal ideation and alcohol outcomes may be due to individuals

using alcohol to regulate or escape the distress associated with suicidal

ideation.

Further research studies on the psychological processes underlying suicidal

behavior have highlighted deficits in social problem-solving ability, and

suggest that suicide attempters may, in addition, be passive problem-solvers

(Pollock and Williams,2004)

Orbach et al. (1990) compared qualitative aspects of problem solving

among suicide attempters, suicide ideators, and nonsuicidal patients.Problem

solving was analyzed along eight qualitative categories: versatility of the

various solutions, reliance on self versus others, activity versus passivity,confrontation versus avoidance, relevance of the solution to the problem,

positive versus negative affect, reference to the future, and extremity of the

solution. The solutions of suicidal patients showed less versatility, more

avoidance, less relevance, more negative affect, and less reference to the
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=%22Pollock%20LR%22%5BAuthor%5Dhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=%22Williams%20JM%22%5BAuthor%5Dhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=%22Williams%20JM%22%5BAuthor%5Dhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=%22Pollock%20LR%22%5BAuthor%5D


19/33


future than the solutions of the non suicidal patients. The suicide attempters

and non suicidal patients offered more active solutions than did the suicide

ideators.

Several researchers have reported the importance of avoidance-

focused and emotion-focused coping as predictors of suicidal ideations.

In HIV positive patients, suicidal ideations were more likely to be

experienced by individuals who cope through avoidance and escape

strategies. (Kalichman et al.,2000) , the relationship between greater

reliance on avoidance coping and suicidal ideations has also been

demonstrated among psychiatric inpatients (Orbach et al.,1990;DZurilla

et al.,1998)

Overall, avoidance-focused and emotion-focused coping are often

reported to be less effective strategies, primarily because these

approaches do not address the direct management of the problem at

hand. This exacerbates the stressful experience, and in turn can lead to

suicidal behaviors as a means to escape (Edwards and Holden, 2001)

Alexander et al.(2009)conducted a study examined how individuals with

serious mental illness and a history of suicidal behavior cope with suicidal

thoughts; the respondents in the study wrote up to five strategies they use to

deal with suicidal thoughts; included spirituality, talking to someone,

positive thinking, using the mental health system, considering consequencesof suicide to family and friends, using peer supports, and doing something

pleasurable.

In a present study of adult survivors of suicide to examine their natural

coping efforts; results indicated that participants experienced high levels of


20/33


psychological distress since the suicide, including elevated symptoms of

depression, guilt, anxiety, and trauma, they also experienced substantial

difficulties in the social arena (e.g., talking with others about the suicide)

,they also reported higher levels of psychological distress, social isolation,

and barriers to seeking help, also depression and a lack of information about

where to find help served as barriers to help-seeking behaviors. Future

research is needed to build on these preliminary findings and to provide a

solid foundation for evidenced-based interventions with survivors

(McMenamy et al., 2008)

DeAngelis (2001) stated that suicide experts are beginning to recognize

common emotional threads that may underlie some suicides. Prominent

among these, they say, are a perceived sense of isolation, a lack of personal

attachments and a dearth of coping skills. Healthy coping, according to crisis

theory, involves four dimensions: involvement in daily activities, a

supportive community, physical well-being and good quality of life; suicide

attempts, on the other hand, can be seen as maladaptive efforts to cope.

Since feelings of hopelessness decreases over time and problem solving

ability nevertheless remains stable it is important that treatment not only

focuses on mood improvement of depressed suicidal and depressed non-

suicidal individuals but also on teaching problem solving techniques.

(Roskar et al., 2007)

These findings may have important implications for therapists and primary

prevention workers, and might pave the way towards recognition of the role

played by coping styles in predicting suicide and its use for cognitive

intervention in high-risk patients (Horesh et al., 2007)


21/33


Religiosity and Psychiatry

The relationship between religion and mental health has been debated for

centuries, since Freud and other famous mental health scholars have put

forth their postulations concerning the neurotic influences of religion in

mental health, many of the 20th

century mental health professionals have

been influenced to hold skeptical and even hostile attitudes toward religion.

However, the past two decades have increasingly found more empirical

evidence supporting the beneficial effects of religiousness on mental health

that apparently contrasts with the postulations of Freud (Yeung & Chan,

2007)

The definition and meaning of spirituality and religion remains a grey area,

they are often regarded as 2 sides of the same coin. However in both the

psychological and religious arenas spirituality is distinct from the traditional

concepts of religion (Emmons and paloutzian, 2003) spirituality refers to

matters concerning god and the human need to find a higher meaning and

the relationship with the metaphysical such as soul, spirit, after-life and

angels(Elkins, et al., 1988; Emmons and paloutzian, 2003). While religionrefers to organized and institutionalized beliefs and system of faith which

serves as a means of spiritual expression and includes: Islam, Christianity,

Buddhism, Judaism, and Hinduism (Piedmont et al., 2001; Piedmont et al.,

2003; Emmons and paloutzian, 2003)

Evidence suggests that the religious and spiritual dimensions, while

sometimes overlapping, often correlate differentially to psychosocial

outcomes thereby yielding more robust information (Hill & Pargament,

2003; Piedmont, et al., 2003).


22/33


Definition of Religion

Paloutzian& Santrock (2002) stated that religion is defined as the

institutional, the organizational, the ritual, and the ideological, whereasspirituality is defined as the personal, the affective, the experiential, and the

thoughtful. This contrast includes the idea that an individual can be spiritual

without being religious or religious without being spiritual.

A second contrast between religion and spirituality involves reserving the

term spiritual for the loftier side of life with spiritualitythe search for

meaning, for unity, or connectedness, for transcendence, and for the highest

level of human potential. While the term religion is correspondingly

reserved for institutionalized activity and formalized beliefs, things that can

be seen as peripheral to spiritual tasks (Paloutzian& Santrock, 2002)

The trend in defining religion is moving away from a broad

conceptualization of the institutional and the individual toward a more

narrow definition in terms of the institutional side of life. The trend in

defining spirituality is to describe it in terms of individual expression that

speaks to a persons highest level of human functioning (Emmons, 1999).

Despite such trends, there is still a great deal of controversy about how to

define religion and spirituality.

Religion and Mental Health

Paloutzian& Santrock (2002) stated that a common stereotype is that

religion is a crutch for weak people and that unconscious feelings of guilt are

the reasons that people become religious. Just because some religious

individuals show signs of a mental disorder does not mean that their

religious beliefs caused the disorder or that they adopted their beliefs as an


23/33


escape. Similarly, just because individuals with a severe mental disorder,

such as schizophrenia, use the word God or have a vision that they are Jesus

or another charismatic religious leader does not mean that religion caused

their severe mental disorder or that they became religious to try to cure

themselves. All that such illustrations do is inform us that aspects of religion

and mental disorder co-occur in a small number of individuals. They tell us

nothing about religion causing mental disorders or mental disorders causing

religiousness.

Role of Religious Coping in Mental Health

Some psychologists have categorized prayer and religious commitment as

defensive coping strategies, arguing that they are less effective in helping

individuals cope than are life-skill, problem-solving strategies (Paloutzian&

Santrock, 2002)

However, recently researchers have found that some styles of religious

coping are associated with high levels of personal initiative and competence,

and that even when defensive religious strategies are initially adopted, they

sometimes set the stage for the later appearance of more-active religious

coping (Pargament & Park, 1995). In one recent study, depression

decreased during times of high stress when there was an increase in

collaborative coping (in which people see themselves as active partners with

God in solving problems) (Brickel et al., 1998). Also, in general, an intrinsic

religious orientation tends to be associated with a sense of competence and

control, freedom from worry and guilt, and an absence of illness, whereas an

extrinsic orientation tends to be associated with the opposite characteristics

(Ventis, 1995).


24/33


Instead of disintegrating during times of high stress, religious coping

behaviors appear to function quite well in these periods (Koenig, 1998). In

one study, individuals were divided into those who were experiencing high

stress and those with low stress (Manton, 1989). In the high-stress group,

spiritual support was significantly related to personal adjustment(indicated

by low depression and high self-esteem). No such links were found in the

low-stress group.

In the research on religious coping, growing body of literature documents

beneficialoutcomes of religious coping(Ahrenset al., 2009; Yeung &Chan

, 2007), and as a result of their efforts in the past two decades, social

scientists have gradually come a consistent view on the positive relationship

between religiousness and mental health.

Turning to religion is an important way of coping; data collected by

(McCrae and Costa, 1986) suggest that such a coping tactic may be

important to many people. One might turn to religion when under stress

widely varying reasons, religion might serve as a source of emotional

support , as a vehicle for positive reinterpretation and growth, or as a tactic

of a coping with a stressor.

Koenig et al. (2001) have recently completed a systematic review of

studies on religion and mental health. They identified 850 relevant studies

conducted in the 20th

century addressing the relationship between religious

involvement and mental health. Although they used a broad term to define

mental health and well-being, which include psychologically perceived well-

being, life satisfaction, hope, optimism, purpose and meaning in life,


25/33


depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation, most of the studies reported the

positive role of religious involvement in maintaining mental health.

George et al. (2002) stated that the social and psychological factors that

have been hypothesized to explain the mental health promoting effects of

religious involvement are health practices, social support, psychosocial

resources such as self-esteem and self-efficacy, and belief structures such as

sense of coherence.

Similarly, Jones (2004) also proposed a set of mediators through which

religiousness could enhance mental and physical outcomes. They are the

increase in relaxation response to stress, decrease in unhealthy behaviors,

increase in social support, more compliance with physicians treatment, a

sense of coherence, more positive self-concept (e.g. higher self-esteem and

less anxiety), and the positive interaction between mental and physical well-

being (a potentiating interaction effect).

Yeung &Chan (2007) (as shown in figure E) stated that religiousness can

promote various resources, including spiritual, cognitive, psychological and

social resources. Not only do these resources have unique positive effects on

mental health, they also interact and mutually reinforce each other. Spiritual

resources could be something particular to religious involvement.

They may be hope, ultimate concern, eternal life after death, spiritual

support, and assistance from an omnipotent GOD. These spiritual resources

could be helpful and beneficial enough to change ones worldview and

cognition from an apathetic, competitive and meaningless worldview to a

world with hope, warmth, and meaningfulness (Yeung &Chan, 2007).


26/33


Figure (E): Mediational channels of the positive effects of religious

involvement on mental health (Yeung &Chan, 2007)

Research pointed out that many people who were not religious previously

might turn to religion for comfort (Koenig, 2001; Koenig & Larson, 2001).

This often involves in beliefs in a living and caring God, private religiousactivities, reading religious scriptures for direction and encouragement, or

looking for support from pastors or members of faith community. In fact,

many studies commonly reported that religiousness was powerful resources

of hope, meaning and purpose in life. These protective and beneficial effects

are particularly strong in people with illness and disability (Ehman et al.,

1999; King, 2000; Koenig et al., 1998; Koenig et al., 2004; Mueller et al.,

2001).

George et al.(2002); Mueller et al.( 2001) stated seven dimensions of

religious involvement: public religious participation (e.g. church

attendance), religious affiliation (e.g. involvement in a religious


27/33


organization/ denomination), private religious practices (e.g. prayer and

reading religious materials), and religious coping (turn to his/her

religion/belief system for assistance), daily religion-related spiritual

experiences (e.g. ones subjective perception of the transcendent in daily

life), religious commitment (times and resources involved in religious

activities and beliefs), and self-rated overall salience of religion (importance

of religion in ones life).

Pargament (2001) stated that in the eyes of many mental health

professionals comfort, solace and relief are the basic functions of religion;

similarly some coping researchers described religion as a form of emotion

focused coping. He further added that religious beliefs and experiences act

as immediate coping devices for current problems, but also as spurs to

further psychological and emotional growth.

Lewis et al. (2005) found that there are presently two dominant research

perspectives within the psychology of religion and well-being literature. The

first dominant construct within contemporary psychology of religion relates

to religious orientation. Individuals described as having an intrinsic

orientation toward religion are described as wholly committed to their

religious beliefs, and the influence of religion is evident in every aspect of

their life (Allport, 1966). On the other hand, those who demonstrate an

extrinsic orientation toward religion have been describe as using religion to

provide protection, consolation, and social status (Allport & Ross, 1967), inother words Intrinsic religious orientation involves religious motives that lie

within the person; the person lives the religion. By contrast, extrinsic

religious orientation involves personal motives that lie outside the religion

itself; using the religion for some nonreligious ends (Hill &Hood, 1999).
http://www.guilford.com/cgi-bin/search.cgi?type=author&pattern=Kenneth%20I.%20Pargament&authlinks=1&cart_id=411054.8000http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:u3H3f67ygEsJ:www.infm.ulst.ac.uk/~chris/100.pdf+model+of+religious+coping&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=eg#9http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:u3H3f67ygEsJ:www.infm.ulst.ac.uk/~chris/100.pdf+model+of+religious+coping&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=eg#9http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:u3H3f67ygEsJ:www.infm.ulst.ac.uk/~chris/100.pdf+model+of+religious+coping&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=eg#9http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:u3H3f67ygEsJ:www.infm.ulst.ac.uk/~chris/100.pdf+model+of+religious+coping&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=eg#9http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:u3H3f67ygEsJ:www.infm.ulst.ac.uk/~chris/100.pdf+model+of+religious+coping&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=eg#9http://www.guilford.com/cgi-bin/search.cgi?type=author&pattern=Kenneth%20I.%20Pargament&authlinks=1&cart_id=411054.8000


28/33


However, due to a number of studies investigating the extrinsic orientation

toward religion (Gorsuch & McPherson, 1989; Gorsuch &Venable, 1983;

King & Hunt, 1969; Leong & Zachar, 1990; Maltby, 1999), there is the

strong suggestion that the extrinsic orientation towards religion comprises

two dimensions, extrinsic-personal (protection, consolation) and extrinsic-

social (religious participation, social status).

Religious coping has been conceptualized as a mediator, accounting for

the relationship between religiousness and mental health in times of stress,

and as a moderator, altering the relationship between stressors and mental

health. 2 forms of religious coping were described:

Collaborative religious coping which is active, refers to sharing the

responsibility for problem solving with God.

The deferring approach is more passive and is characterized by giving

the responsibility for problem solving to God (Fabricatore et

al.,2004)

Pargament et al. (1988) also described three problem solving styles in

religious coping: self-directing, deferring, collaborative. A self-directing

style stresses personal agency and involves lower levels of traditional

religious involvement. Deferring problem-solving implies awaiting solutions

from God, and shows lower levels of coping competence. The collaborative

style of problem-solving involves active personal exchange with God,

internalized commitment and higher levels of personal competence.

Religious coping appears to decrease the risk of suicidal ideations.

Among depressed adults with a history of child abuse, an inverse
http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:u3H3f67ygEsJ:www.infm.ulst.ac.uk/~chris/100.pdf+model+of+religious+coping&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=eg#9http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:u3H3f67ygEsJ:www.infm.ulst.ac.uk/~chris/100.pdf+model+of+religious+coping&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=eg#9http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:u3H3f67ygEsJ:www.infm.ulst.ac.uk/~chris/100.pdf+model+of+religious+coping&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=eg#9http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:u3H3f67ygEsJ:www.infm.ulst.ac.uk/~chris/100.pdf+model+of+religious+coping&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=eg#9http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:u3H3f67ygEsJ:www.infm.ulst.ac.uk/~chris/100.pdf+model+of+religious+coping&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=eg#9


29/33


relationship was demonstrated between the severity of suicidal ideations

and religious beliefs. (Dervic et al., 2006)

Religious coping decreased the risk of suicidal ideation among

African American and White college students(Walker and

Bishop,2005)and Latin American immigrants.

Hovey (1999) added that religion may protect against suicidal thoughts

by providing meaning in peoples lives, as well as by fostering a sense of

hope for the future.

It needs to point out that religiousness does not necessarily bring about

positive mental health outcomes in patients. A two-year longitudinal study

indicated that use of negative religious coping, such as viewing God or a

higher power as punitive, would have hazardous effect on patients

psychological and physical health (Pargament et al., 2004). On the other

hand, patients who adopted positive religious coping to deal with their

illness, such as seeking spiritual support and religiously benevolent

reappraisal of their situations, showed concrete improvements in mental and

psychical health two years later. The relationships between positive religious

coping and better mental and physical health outcomes was significant.

Religion and spirituality have been linked, positively and negatively, to a

host of outcomes across multiple domains of physical and mental health

(Baumeister, 2002; Pargament, 1997). As religious attendance, did not

predict subjective well being, replicating previous research in the area of

positive psychology and spirituality (Ciarrocchi & Deneke, 2005).

Negative religious coping, commonly referred to now as spiritual

struggles(Murray-Swank, et al., 2005) on the other hand, can be viewed as

having a less secure relationship with God, with a greater struggle with

meaning and belief in God, with a more disconnected congregational


30/33


relationship, and more spiritual discontent (Pargament et al., 1998;

Zinnbauar & Pargament,1998).

Depressive patients may derive consolation as well as struggle from their

religion, Braam et al. (2010) found that the more or less universal finding

about 'feeling abandoned by God' may suggest how depression represents an

existential void, irrespective of the religious background.

Negative religious coping strategies had several positive associations with

depressive symptoms, sub-threshold depression, and major depressive

disorder: the most robust association was found for the item 'wondered

whether God has abandoned me'. Other significant associations were found

for interpreting situations as punishment by God, questioning whether God

exists, and expressing anger to God (Braam et al., 2010).


31/33


Summing Up

Coping is also defined as a process by which an individual manages the

ever-changing environment. Coping may be seen as actions taken by personsdirected at confronting demands, solving problems, and/or altering and

managing stressors. Coping behavior is generally influenced by maturation

and cognitive development such as problem-solving ability, and

understanding peers and adults.

Two concepts are central to any psychological stress theory: appraisal, i.e.,

individuals' evaluation of the significance of what is happening for their

well-being, and coping, i.e., individuals' efforts in thought and action to

manage specific demands. There are two basic forms of appraisal, primary

and secondary appraisal.

Resource theories of stress are not primarily concerned with factors that

create stress, but with resources that preserve well being in the face of

stressful encounters. Several social and personal constructs have been

proposed, such as social support, sense of coherence, hardiness, self-

efficacy, or optimism.

An overview of the perspectives of coping theorists shows that they have

generally categorized coping strategies under three groups: a) strategies

focused on resolving the problem; b) strategies used to alleviate the

emotions triggered by the situation; and c) strategies involving social

support.Lazaruswent on to make an important and now widely accepted distinction

between two types of coping. In one, problem focused; the person attempts

to address directly the problems that he is facing. In the second, emotion


32/33


focused; the person tries to dampen or minimize the emotional state itself,

without addressing the problem that elicited the state.

Coping has three main (protective) functions: Management of the problem

causing the distress through elimination or modification of the conditions

giving rise to it, alteration of (perceptually controlling) the meaning of the

experience so as to neutralize its problematic character and, regulation of the

emotional distress produced by the problem.

Ineffective coping is an inability to for a valid appraisal of stressors,

inadequate choices of practiced responses, and/or inability to use available

resources.

Recent research conductedhas found that people with psychiatric disabilities

tended to utilize passive and emotional-focused strategies to cope with their

illness.

Next to feelings of hopelessness, certain cognitive features such as problem

solving deficiency, attentional bias and reduced future positive thinking are

involved in the development and maintenance of suicidal behavior.

Suicide experts are beginning to recognize common emotional threads that

may underlie some suicides. Prominent among these are a perceived sense of

isolation, a lack of personal attachments and a dearth of coping skills.

Healthy coping, according to crisis theory, involves four dimensions:

involvement in daily activities, a supportive community, physical well-being

and good quality of life; suicide attempts, on the other hand, can be seen as

maladaptive efforts to cope.

These findings may have important implications for therapists and primary

prevention workers, and might pave the way towards recognition of the role

played by coping styles in predicting suicide and its use for cognitive

intervention in high-risk patients.


33/33


Turning to religion is an important way of coping; data collected by suggest

that such a coping tactic may be important to many people. One might turn

to religion when under stress widely varying reasons, religion might serve as

a source of emotional support , as a vehicle for positive reinterpretation and

growth, or as a tactic of a coping with a stressor.

The definition and meaning of spirituality and religion remains a grey area,

they are often regarded as 2 sides of the same coin. However in both the

psychological and religious arenas spirituality is distinct from the traditional

concepts of religion.

Spirituality refers to matters concerning god and the human need to find a

higher meaning and the relationship with the metaphysical such as soul,

spirit, after-life and angels. While religion refers to organized and

institutionalized beliefs and system of faith which serves as a means of

spiritual expression and includes: Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Judaism,

and Hinduism.

Documents

Chapter 3 Coping Religiosity And Suicide