Roman Ossowski*, Justyna Żabińska, Marta Kosiol
Kazimierz Wielki University of Bydgoszcz, Poland
Timidity Against Coping Difficult Situations
Abstract
Regardless of whether or not the respondents were timid, they were more likely to apply stress coping styles which are perceived to be fairly constructive and widely omitted
the task-oriented style. Instead of focusing on solving the problem, timid people more
often focused on their negative emotional states and tried to cope with them. People who
did not regard themselves as timid, more often applied avoidant style.
QQ
Introduction
In early adulthood a young person takes on new life roles connected
with finding a partner, setting up home, finding job, becoming independent.
These situations are regarded as new, hence, they may bring about stress
whether or not the person sees themselves as timid. People struggling with
timidity (shyness) find it especially difficult to face situation like a job interview, a date, a social meeting. On the one hand new and unknown situations
bring about psychical tension, on the other – timidity hinders adequate
behaviour like showing assets. Therefore, timid people should primarily
focus on limiting their timidity before they move on to deal with specific life challenges i.e. difficult situations which naturally result from social
participation.
The article focuses on the notion of timidity in early adulthood as well as
the relationship between timidity and styles of coping with difficult situations.
Coping such situations is an important factor that reduces the level of timidity.
The conducted research aimed to acknowledge the existence of a relationship between self-appraisal as timid and coping styles in stressful
* Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Roman Ossowski,
e-mail: [email protected]
80
Roman Ossowski, Justyna Żabińska, Marta Kosiol
situations. What has been studies were the intensity of timidity, coping
styles and their interdependence. Also gender and marital status were examined with regards to their contribution to self-appraisal as timid and
the choice of coping styles.
QQ
The concept of timidity, symptomatic
and syndromatic approach
Timidity is defined as either a state (being a form of social fear) or a relatively stable and permanent human character trait (being dispositional
timidity) (Crozier and Design, 1982; In: Dzwonkowska, 2009). Timidity
may be primarily understood as avoiding social interactions and reducing
the level of individual’s effectiveness in the presence of other people (Borecka-Biernat, 1994). Timidity is grounded both in nature and in upbringing. Its
causes may be traced in chemical processes in brain, the level of reactivity,
the way being treated by others (parents, teachers), misappraisal of oneself,
adaptative problems, appearance, low tolerance for ambiguity or cultural expectations (Carducci, 2008).
Timidity is discussed in subject literature from the symptomatic and syndromatic perspective.
Earlier, historical, symptomatic approach understands timidity in
emotional and behavioural aspects. Every concept from this perspective
underlines one of these ways of functioning. Their separations is significant
with regards to differential diagnosis of timid people. Moreover, another
aspect of timidity is frequently underlined, namely self-appraisal which is
a specific attitude of timid people towards themselves displayed as a sense
of inferiority, lack of confidence, lack of trust in one’s personal skills, diminishing actually held skills and a tendency to underestimate themselves.
The more contemporary, syndromatic approach sees timidity as a complex
set of characteristic syndromes related to simultaneous malfunction of behavioural, emotional and self-appraisal spheres (Harwas-Napierała, 1995).
Paul Pilkonis and Philip Zimbardo have determined two types of timidity
components from syndromatic perspective: private timidity and public timidity. They claim that every timid person experiences both components
(Harwas-Napierała, 1995).
QQ
Timidity Against Coping Difficult Situations
Genetic, temperamental, personality and social
conditionings of timidity
81
Based on the published research results it may be stated that the tendency
to being timid can be inherited, however, it is personal experiences which are
responsible for whether or not an individual is going to be timid (Zimbardo,
2002). Therefore the rates for timidity inheritance ought to be treated with
due caution. Moreover, not every type of timidity may be inherited. Dispositional timidity, regarded as a relatively permanent feature, as well as anxiety
timidity reveal a high rate of inheritance, however, the self-appraisal timidity
does not as its causes are mainly located in the environment (Dzwonkowska, 2009). Analyzing the relationships between timidity and temperament
one may observe that environmental-educational interactions are modified
according to the temperamental features of a child. People differ from one
another as to the construction of the nervous system, therefore, require different stimulation. Individuals with strong nervous system, being punished,
improve their behaviour and mobilize themselves to action. However, individuals with a weaker nervous system, with reduced arousal and restrain
processes, withdraw from further activity, are more prone to break down due
to life obstacles and always discern adverse options. Such behaviour may lead
to increased apprehensiveness and timidity. Furthermore, the level of reactivity, one of the main dimensions of temperament as claimed by Jan Strelau,
influences timidity (Strelau, 1982, 2006). Reactivity is a tendency to react
with specific intensity; it determines sensory and emotional sensitivity as
well as the function of the body. Strelau also suggests that people are different
with regards to the type of nervous system. People of strong nervous systems
are regarded as low reactive with the mechanism of suppressing stimulation.
On the other hand, people of weak nervous system are highly reactive and
develop such “a physiological mechanisms which increases stimulation”. Another temperamental trait – activity serves as a “regulator of the demand for
stimulation” and is determined by the reactivity of an individual. Every unit
strives after a personally perceived optimal level of activity (Strelau, 2006).
The research results indicated that timidity may also develop in people with
strong nervous system and low level of reactivity which confirms the more
significant role of social conditionings of timidity (Dzwonkowska, 2009).
Maria Tyszkowa connects the timidity syndrome with the structure
of personality. According to the author timidity comprises of: a negative
82
Roman Ossowski, Justyna Żabińska, Marta Kosiol
divergence between the “real” and “ideal” self (when a timid person is aware
of the differences between what he or she “is like” and what they “should be”),
high expectations with regards to fulfilling roles and performing life tasks
(the dominance of the “ideal self”), a sense of being inadequate for the standards and the tasks which the unit aims to fulfil, perceiving others as people of
high expectations accepted by the unit and low, unstable self-appraisal with
low self-esteem (Harwas-Napierała, 1995, Tyszkowa, 1978).
Timidity as a trait of character may also be regarded with respect to
public self-awareness and apprehensiveness therefore the division into
self-awareness timidity and apprehensive timidity (Buss, 1986).
Barbara Harwas-Napierała (1995) noticed that social, including family,
factors play a significant role in the shaping of timidity. It is mainly about
the personality traits of parents and their approach to upbringing. In his
research (1994) Zimbardo proved that the timidity of parents (especially
the mothers) and their children are correlated (Dzwonkowska, 2009). Therefore, children may develop timidity through social learning – children copy
parents, hence, if the parent is shy as will be the child (Harwas-Napierała,
1995). Harwas-Napierała (1995) also suggests that timidity may be shaped
as a result of parents depriving of children’s needs e.g. if children lack satisfactory fulfilment of the need for security, independence and autonomy
through excess requirements or over-protectiveness of parents. Zimbardo
(2004) revealed that the order in which children were born may influence
the development of timidity as the majority of shy people happened to be
first-borns (Dzwonkowska, 2009).
Both low social acceptance and social rejection may become a factor
that brings about timidity. The research also show that physical attractiveness influences the way individuals are socially perceived and whether or
not they are going to be accepted (Aronson, Wilson, Akert, 1997, as cited in:
Dzwonkowska, 2009). Additionally, timidity is a predicate of unemployment
(Dzwonkowska, 2009) which, prolonged, may cause increased feeling of
loneliness and social worthlessness that may lead to event greater increase
in timidity (Ibidem).
Zimbardo (2002) outlines the cultural factors that contribute to the development of timidity which are: a high appreciation of individualism and
competition in society, promotion of the cult of “ego”, rewarding individual
successes and treating failures as a source of personal embarrassment, lack of
faith in common social goals, discouraging from open manifestation of feelings,
setting unlimited aspirations, severe taboo concerning sexuality, depreciating
Timidity Against Coping Difficult Situations
83
of personal experience, subjecting love and acceptance to behaviour, economical uncertainty and instability of social bond (Breidenstein-Cutspec,
Goering, 1989, as cited in: Dzwonkowska, 2009).
QQ
Consequences of timidity
Consequences of timidity are both positive and negative, however,
the majority of timid people see their shyness as an unwanted feature and
would like to get rid of it (Harwas-Napierała, 1995). The consequences of
timidity are hardly desired by people displaying this trait. The main disadvantage is the frequent inhibition of normal forms of reacting in situations
of social exposition – when undergoing social appraisal but also when there
is only a prospect of being appraised. A timid person, facing the need to
perform in front of others, may find it difficult to gather their thoughts and
support their point of view, may be at a loss for words to express their ideas, may stammer or have difficulty in focusing attention. Timidity effects in
a person putting excessive attention to their reactions. This, in turn, complicates precise thinking and effective communication. A timid person in such
a situation may seem incompetent and less skilful than they really are. An
outcome of such behaviour may be a greater difficulty in finding job by shy
people. Timid people frequently produce poorer results in task-oriented situations when they are subject to social exposition. Nevertheless, their results
are of full value when performed in isolation (Ludwiczak, 1990, as cited in:
Harwas-Napierała, 1995).
Timid people frequently refrain from activity, remain passive. They do not
initiate activities, do not actively participate in conferences, meetings or parties among family and friends. They withdraw from interpersonal contacts
(Harwas-Napierała, 1995). Timidity is an obstacle to meeting new people,
enjoying interpersonal contacts, establishing friendships. Timid people feel
like they are left alone, unnecessary, not understood, worse. They also believe
that timidity inhibits them from being firm, assertive when expressing their
ideas or asserting their rights (Ibidem).
From one perspective, timid people may have difficulty finding a permanent partner, starting a family because of the feeling of being worse, not
understood and experiencing problems in interpersonal contacts. From
another perspective, research show that timid people may be perceived as
an attractive partner for others (Harwas-Napierała, 1995). Among positive
84
Roman Ossowski, Justyna Żabińska, Marta Kosiol
consequences of being timid, the respondents of the research conducted
by Maciejewska listed: an ability to observe and stand in the background, occasion for being more careful in interpersonal contacts, avoiding conflicts,
being perceived as a humble person (Harwas-Napierała, 1995).
QQ
Stress from psychological perspective
There are three main currents in defining psychological stress which
differ according to its source. The oldest is the current that sees stress as
stimulus, situation or external event of specific properties. Another approach
did not place stress in the environment but within a unit, treating it as human
internal reactions, both physiological and psychological, which are experienced internally.
The third and most modern current, which combines the two earlier approaches, sees psychological stress as a relationship between external factors
and human features. It manifests itself in a distortion or probable distortion
of the balance between requirements and abilities to fulfil them. Both the requirements and the abilities may be real or may exist only in the appraisal of
the individual itself (Heszen, Sęk, 2007).
The notion of stress was introduced in 1936 by Hans Selye who defined
it as a non-specific reaction of the body to any issued demands (Selye, 1979,
p. 25). It is a definition which approaches stress rather from physiological
than psychological perspective. The researcher also determined positive
stress, which mobilizes to undertake activity, the so-called eustress – in contrast with distress – which hinders or prevents an individual from performing
a task and being unprofitable.
According to other researchers who examined the notion of stress –
Richard Lazarus and Susan Folkman, stress is: a specific relationship between
the person and the environment which is appraised by the person as burdensome
or exceeding its resources and threatening its wellbeing (Lazarus and Folkman,
1984, as cited in: Terelak, 2001, p. 70). The authors regard stress in terms of
a relationship between human features and external factors but also as a kind
of transaction between the individual and the environment. The experience
of threat partially depends on the situation and partially on the individual’s input in the situation. Therefore, it is expected that the appraisal of
threatening situation is influenced by the way the individual organizes and
represents the knowledge of the world (cognitive approach). The cognitive
Timidity Against Coping Difficult Situations
85
character is based on an assumption that emotions and stress result from
cognitive processes because a human – the subject of the relationship, elaborates, understands and appraises the relationship deciding whether or not
the transaction is perceived as stress (Carver, 2000). Therefore, stress is
neither purely dependent on the objective factors nor the individual. It is of
relative character and the interrelationship and feedback between the unit
and the environment constitute a whole, which may not be limited to a sum
of the components.
QQ
Coping with stress – as a process, strategy and style
According to Strelau: the state of stress and coping with it are inseparable
concepts (Strelau, 2000). Coping with stress is the whole of human activities of regulatory character, undertaken in a stressful situation. Therefore,
coping with stress actually means dealing with certain external or internal
requirements which burden or exceed the resources of a human (Lazarus and
Folkman, 1984, as cited in: Terelak, 2001).
Coping with stress may be examined from three perspectives: either as
a process, or a strategy, or a style. The process of coping denotes the whole
of activities undertaken by people in a stressful situation. It has a complex
and dynamic character. It may be subdivided according to time into smaller
chunks called strategies or styles of coping. Lazarus and Folkman (1984) see
the process of coping stress as constantly changing cognitive and behavioural
efforts undertaken with the aim to fulfil certain external and internal demands.
The demands are appraised by an individual as burdensome or exceeding
their resources (Strelau et al., 2005). Strategy is relatively shorter and may be
instantiated by a change of current habits. It is more of a reaction and specific
action in a specific situation. Eventually, a style is a relatively steady tendency in coping stress which is individual for every person (Heszen-Niejodek,
2000). Lazarus and Folkman are the authors of the most commonly cited
definition which sees coping with stress as: constantly changing cognitive and
behavioural efforts aiming to deal with specific external and internal demands
appraised by an individual as burdensome or exceeding their resources (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984, as cited in: Strelau et al., 2005, p. 7). This definition
assumes that coping with stress is a range of deliberate efforts undertaken
when a situation is appraised as stressful. The appraisal does not have to be
realistic and people do not have to be aware of the goal of the activity.
86
Roman Ossowski, Justyna Żabińska, Marta Kosiol
Determining psychological stress as an internal state of a unit which
was brought about by external factors, Lazarus revealed his interest in individual differences which influence the stress coping methods. According to
Lazarus (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984, as cited in: Strelau, 2000), the transaction between a unit and the environment undergoes a constant cognitive
appraisal – it is a primary appraisal made by a human. The appraisal differentiates whether or not, a stimulus is stressful for the unit. The relationship
may be appraised as unimportant, favourable-positive or stressful. Providing
that the stimulus is regarded as stressor, tension appears, which evokes certain psychophysiological and emotional reactions. A stressful relationship is
based on a distorted balance, or its probability, between the requirements
and expectations imposed on a unit and the possibilities of fulfilling them.
A human perceives their resources as insufficient which triggers out the tension (Terelak, 2001). According to Strelau (1996) stress is caused by the lack
of balance between the requirements and abilities of a unit to cope with them.
The transaction appraised as stressful is further regarded as: a challenge,
threat or loss. Each of these appraisals is followed by different emotions
and behaviour. Regarding stress as a challenge allows for the existence of
both losses and benefits. In this case, a unit experiences positive and negative feelings. The negative emotions are mainly fear and anxiety, whereas,
the positive emotions include arousal, excitement, amusement. They may
contribute to focusing on the benefit and development and push the unit to
undertake preventive measures and collect resources which may be helpful
in a similar situation in the future. Similarly, appraising stress as a threat is of
anticipatory character, however, what is expected in this case, are the losses.
It is connected with negative emotions like fear or anxiety. The efforts undertaken by a human are focused on avoiding the anticipated losses and reducing
their effects. Finally, the appraisal of stress as a loss occurs when the damage
and loss are already regarded as an existing fact. The unit in such situations
only experiences negative emotions like sorrow, grieve, anxiety. The coping
method in this case takes the form of defence mechanisms or seeking support
from other people (Heszen, Sęk, 2007).
When a relationship is primarily regarded as stressful, a secondary
appraisal begins. Both cognitive processes – the primary and the secondary appraisal, appear almost simultaneously and are linked to each other.
The secondary appraisal, however, focuses on the resources used for coping
stress. It concerns the possibilities and abilities to undertake actions aiming
to remove the causes of stress or reduce its effects and, in case of a challenge,
even to obtain benefits (Gałuszka, 2000; Heszen, Sęk, 2007).
Timidity Against Coping Difficult Situations
87
Therefore, coping with stress may have a regulatory function. On the one
hand, a unit tries to maintain balance between the external requirements and
personal abilities, on the other – he or she struggles to reduce the divergences between them (Strelau, 1996).
QQ
Stress coping styles
Lazarus and Folkman (1984) have determined two functions which account for the process of coping stress: task-oriented and aimed at emotional
self-regulation. The former is oriented at improving the unfavourable relationship between the requirements and abilities. If the personal resources are
lower than the requirements, a human tries to increase the resources (Strelau
et al., 2005). Units undertake tasks in order to solve the problem either through
cognitive transformations or attempts to change the situation. Such people
focus on the task taking particular notice of planning. It is a function aimed
at solving the problem either by changing the environment which threatens
the unit or by changing personal unprofitable actions (Heszen and Sęk, 2008).
Units undertake activities aiming to remove the source of the threat, changing
the direction of its influence and reducing it negative effect. In the latter case,
when a unit is oriented at emotional self-regulation, he or she tries to reduce
the unpleasant tension and relieve negative emotional states connected with
stress by concentrating on themselves and their own experiences of anxiety,
tension and sense of guilt (Heszen-Niejodek, 2000). People undertake actions
aimed to reduce or tame the unwanted emotions resulting from stress. They
concentrate on taming their phobias and anxieties. Such people also have
a tendency to confabulate and wishful thinking. All the activities are undertaken with an aim to reduce the negative emotional states and arouse positive
emotions in order to motivate and mobilize the units to take actions, however,
they may happen to increase the feeling of stress. Nevertheless, both function
are not separable and independent. They interweave and influence one another in a given situation (Heszen-Niejodek, 2000).
Norman S. Endler and D.A. Parker, being the followers of Lazarus and
Folkman, suggested three styles based on the functions of coping stress.
Apart from the task-oriented and emotional styles, they also determined
the third style – focused on avoiding. The researchers observed that humans,
in a stressful situation, undertake actions resulting from the interaction between the features of the stressful situation and the coping style which is
88
Roman Ossowski, Justyna Żabińska, Marta Kosiol
unique for every individual. Furthermore, a coping style is a relatively constant, permanent and person-specific disposition to cope with stressful
situations. According to the researchers, the task-oriented style is applied
by people who strive to such an understanding of a situation which enables
them to alter it. Being in a stressful situation, they take measures to solve
the problem. The second, emotional style is characteristic of people who approach stress by concentrating on themselves and their emotions trying to
reduce the accompanying tension. The third – avoidant style is an approach,
when units refrain from thinking about, experiencing and going through
the stressful situation. They achieve it either by engaging themselves in substitute activities, e.g. overeating, watching television, sleeping, or by seeking
social contacts (Strelau et al., 2005).
QQ
Emerging adulthood period
After the period of rapid developmental changes leading to biological
maturity and the ability to procreate as well as to social maturity which manifests itself in proper undertaking of new roles (starting home, bringing up
children, starting and developing professional activity) or autonomous running their lives, young people enter into the period of early adulthood (Oleś,
2002; Gurba, 2000;Turner, Helmes, 1999). It is the time when the individuals
begin to realize the chosen lifestyle and establish their own place in the world
(Turner, Helms, 2000). The young people face new challenges: achieving psychological maturity as well as social and economical independence (Gurba,
2000).
QQ
Personality and socio-emotional development of
young adults
Emerging adulthood, perceived by Erik Erikson, is the sixth of eight stages. It begins when the conflict of adolescence: identity – distraction/lack of
identity is solved and a unit is able to determine who they are and who they
are able to be (Trempała, 2011). After a positive solution of the adolescent
conflict, when the identity is finally determined, individuals face another problem, namely: intimacy – isolation, i.e. how to construct the identity including
Timidity Against Coping Difficult Situations
89
other people; how to achieve the ability to love without losing the sense of
personal identity or immersion and how not to become lonely (Bee, 1998).
A unit ought to achieve the ability to enter into intimate relationship with
another person and take the responsibility for it. An inability to cope with
the conflict of this developmental period may lead to isolation of a unit and
withdrawal from establishing and maintaining social contacts (Gurba, 2000).
Other threats an individual is exposed to at this stage are: the lack of emotional and economical independence from others – especially observable among
women. Excessively strong relationship with parents visible in nannying
and the inability to loosen them which may hinder the transfer of emotions
on another person. The outlined circumstances effect in a prolongation of
the emerging adulthood as a transition period before achieving stability. Another threat is the lack of social support, not establishing personal ways of
fulfilling roles and aiming at a fixed and unadapted realization of the roles of
an employee and a partner (Bee, 2003).
The activity of young adults is mainly concentrated around two areas:
professional work or studying and family – partner/spouse and children
(Gurba, 2000).
An important aspect of emerging adulthood is moving out of parents’
house. It sometimes doesn’t occur until young people become a spouse or
a partner. More and more often, usually in highly developed countries, a transition period is observed when an individual is not related to anybody and
lives on their own. Some people consciously decide to live in solitude (Thornton, Young-DeMarco, Goldscheider, 1993, as cited in: Bee, 1998). In the course
of psychological emancipation, a young person develops emotional distance
from parents and transfers the main attachment onto friends (Bee, 1998).
Based on Erikson’s concept, five types of early adulthood relationships have been recognised with respect to the commitment and depth of
the relationships. This division regards both partner relationships (seeking
a potential spouse) and friendly relationships. According to Erikson, the ability to establish intimate relationships is the most profitable and makes
a positive solution to the intimacy-isolation conflict of this phase. It accounts
for a success in fulfilling family (as a partner or a parent), friendly and professional roles. Undeveloped identity may cause inability to establish intimate
relationships which results in entering into typical, early-adulthood relationships i.e. pre-intimate or pseudo-intimate. Moreover, it may lead to total
isolation from close relationships and acquiring a rejectful attitude to others.
It negatively affects undertaking social roles (Wojciechowska, 2004).
90
Roman Ossowski, Justyna Żabińska, Marta Kosiol
The breaking point in early adulthood is the moment of becoming a parent. It may be a source of intense stress and frustration, nevertheless, it allows
for achieving happiness and satisfaction and enriches the development of
the personality of young adults (Gurba, 2000).
Apart from the roles of a life partner and a parent, equally important is
the role of an employee. In emerging adulthood, it is fulfilled at two stages:
an attempt and an establishment. At the former stage, alternative variants of
work are trialled, whereas, at the latter – an individual obtains a fixed carrier
path.
In addition to family and work, every young adult creates a supportive
group called entourage, consisting of a partner plus family and friends. Young
adults may have a greater number of friends than older adults, however,
the number of intimate friendships is equal throughout lifetime. Women establish friendly relationships which are more intimate and provide greater
emotional support (Bee, 1998).
QQ
Timidity during emerging adulthood against stress
coping styles in psychological research
The research over the relationship between stress coping styles and
timidity was conducted by Katarzyna Adamczyk (2005, as cited in: Dzwonkowska, 2009). The research included 118 adults, aged between 18 and 63yrs.
To measure the stress coping styles, the author applied a Polish version of
Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations (CISS) questionnaire by Endler and
Parker (Szczepaniak, Strelau, Wrześniewski, 1996, as cited in: Dzwonkowska, 2009). The results revealed that timid people tended to frequently apply
emotional style (r = .34) and rarely task-oriented (r = –.18) and avoidant style
(r = –.25) in the form of seeking contacts (Dzwonkowska, 2009).
A similar correlation was recognised with a use of a different research
tool by N. Eisenberg, R.A. Fabes and B. Murphy (1995, as cited in: Dzwonkowska, 2009). The researchers used the COPE scale – a scale used to measure
problem coping. Their results suggested that timidity reveals a relationship
with measures of coping problems. It shows a negative correlation with
constructive coping (r = –.24) (Eisenberg, Fabes, Murphy, 1995, as cited in:
Dzwonkowska, 2009) in the form of: active coping, planning, positive interpretation, suppressing substitute activities. The researchers also proved that
timid people go for an avoidant style of coping. Timidity revealed a weak
Timidity Against Coping Difficult Situations
91
positive correlation with avoiding i.e. denying, refrain from thinking, refrain
from taking actions, measured with COPE scale (r = .15). The two remaining
COPE scales: seeking social support and accepting the situation, reveal no
correlation with timidity (respectively r = –.06 and r = –.10) (Dzwonkowska,
2009). The researchers also proved that timidity positively correlates with
higher intensity of negative emotions (r = .21) and lower intensity of positive emotions (r = –.31) – negative emotions more frequently appear with
emotional and avoidant coping styles, whereas, positive emotions are characteristic of task-oriented style (Dzwonkowska, 2009).
The results suggest that timid people do not tend to apply task-oriented
stress coping style. They are more prone to go for emotional and avoidant
styles, yet, they rarely seek support as a form of dealing with stress.
QQ
Material and methods
The research included 60 people aged between 20yrs and 26yrs – 30 females and 30 males. All participants were chosen intentionally. The research
was held at the end of January and the beginning of February, 2014. Participants filled in Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations (CISS) and Timidity
Questionnaire.
The Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations (CISS) consists of 48 sentences describing behaviour undertaken in a stressful situation. Particular
sentences are assigned to three scales which determine three coping styles.
The styles are: task-oriented style (SSZ), emotional style (SSE) and avoidant
style (SSU). The last one may take two different forms – engagement in substitute activities (ACZ) or seeking social contact (PKT) (Endler and Parker,
1994, as cited in: Strelau et al., 2005). The respondents were supposed to
appraise each undertaken activity according to a 5-point scale. The reliability
of CISS questionnaire was checked through an internal consistency test and
absolute stability test. The internal consistency was appraised on the basis of
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient in five separate trials. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for particular scales were very high – from .72 to .92. The absolute
stability also showed satisfactory correlation coefficients – between .52 and
.73. (Endler and Parker, 1990, as cited in: Strelau et all., 2005). The validity
of CISS was verified through a factor structure analysis for factors obtained
in separate studies as well as through estimating the criterion validity. Both
proved satisfactory.
92
Roman Ossowski, Justyna Żabińska, Marta Kosiol
The Timidity Questionnaire is a modified version of Stanford Timidity
Questionnaire by Philip Zimbardo. The questions were standardized using
the 1 to 4 Likert scale which regards the frequency of the activity, phenomena, feelings and emotions concerning timidity. The number of questions
was changed – and currently the test consists of 71. The test also includes
six subscales: labelling oneself, cause attributions, being perceived by others, situational and interpersonal factors causing timidity, physiological,
cognitive, affective and behavioural reactions and positive/negative consequences of timidity. The reliability of the questionnaire and its subscales
was verified through a single, split-half test conducted on a group of 30 people. A random choice of questions was applied, yet, the attention was put to
including the majority of even questions in one half and odd questions in
the other which is beneficial for estimating reliability (Hornowska, 2010).
The Cronbach’s alpha was .93 which means the test is highly reliable. Questions number 39, 43, 54, 66 and 68 decreased the reliability of the test,
however, they were not eliminated as the authors decided they are important
in the analysis of the scales. The Cronbach’s alpha for particular subscales
was between .65 and .88. The results for each scale were obtained by summing up all the points. The respondents could collect from 3 to 284 points for
the whole questionnaire. The answers to questions 1–3 classified whether
or not a person is timid. The respondents who were not regarded as timid
finished the test at question 3 and received from 3 to 6 points. Timid people
could receive from 77 to 284.
The results of the Timidity Questionnaire showed that the research
included 29 people who appraised themselves as timid (12 males and 17
females) and 31 people who did not regard themselves as timid, neither at
the time of the research nor earlier (18 males and 13 females).
QQ
Results
Analysing the intensity of stress coping styles, it was observed that in
both groups (regardless of being timid or not): within the task-oriented
style, the majority of people obtained sten 3 (low level); within emotional
and avoidant styles the majority of people obtained sten 6 and 5 (medium
level).
In order to examine whether self-appraising as timid differentiated
the choice of a coping style and whether the choice depended on gender or
Timidity Against Coping Difficult Situations
93
marital status, the authors applied t-Student test. The results were: self-appraising as timid differentiated people with regards to two coping styles:
emotional style (p = .01) and avoidant style (p = .02) – but only with respect
to seeking social contacts (p = .03). In case of engagement in substitute activities, there was a statistic tendency (p = .09).
Timid people more often chose emotional style than people who did not
appraised themselves as such. Timid people received points between 26–65.
The mean value was 49 points. People who did not regard themselves as
timid obtained points between 26–57, and the mean value was 44 points.
More than 45 points at SSE scale were obtained by 22 out of 29 timid people.
The same result was obtained by 14 out of 31 people who did not regard
themselves as timid.
Timid people less frequently chose avoidant style. They obtained between
29 and 52 points, with the mean value of 43 points, whereas, non-timid people obtained between 33–57 and the mean value was 47 points. More than
45 points were obtained at this scale by 22 out of 31 non-timid people which
makes more than a half of the group. With regards to timid people, 13 out of
29 obtained more than 45.
Timid people also less frequently chose seeking social contacts as a form
of an avoidant style than non-timid people. At the scale of seeking contact,
timid people obtained results between 9 and 23, mean value 15,5 points. On
the other hand non-timid people obtained between 13 and 25 points, mean
value 18. More than a half of non-timid people (18 out of 31) obtained a score
above 16 points at the PKT scale. In the group of timid people 11 out of 29
obtained such a result.
Single people regarding themselves as timid more often chose SSE than
those who appraised themselves as non-timid. Timid respondents obtained
results between 38 and 60 points, mean values 52 points. Non-timid people
obtained results between 26–56, mean value 44 points. 10 out of 11 timid
singles obtained the score of above 45 points in comparison to the group of
non-timid cohabitants, where such a result was obtained only by 7 out of 16
(almost a half).
After applying the t-Student test, it turned out that only women who appraised themselves as timid more often chose the emotional style and less
frequently – the avoidant style in the form of seeking social contact. Among
men, the results were not statistically significant (p >.05).
94
QQ
Roman Ossowski, Justyna Żabińska, Marta Kosiol
Conclusions
On the basis of the obtained results timid people may be characterised
as follows:
QQ timid people appraised their timidity as medium, slightly increased
and the majority stated that they are apt to overcome and hide it from other
people;
QQ They mainly perceived the fear of a negative appraisal and rejection
and the lack of self-confidence as the sources of their timidity. Approximately
one/ third of the respondents sought the causes of timidity in a fear of intimate relationships with other people, lack of social skills, lack of personal
adaptation and affection to non-social interests;
QQ less people felt intimidated in a small group, however when they
became the centre of attention, the size of group was insignificant for experiencing the feeling;
QQ timidity more often appeared during contact with people of higher social status, opposite sex or in situations which required assertiveness and
firmness;
QQ in more than half of the cases (17 out of 29), timidity brought about
distortions in logical thinking, disturbances of attention, concentration and
memorizing in front of other people. As a result the people obtained worse
effects than they could have obtained working in solitude;
QQ the symptoms of timidity were usually determined based on personal
emotions, thoughts and other internal indicators as well as on visible behaviour in a particular situation (i.a. shaking hands, stammering, sweating);
QQ timid people claim that this trait of character brings about social problems, complicates meeting new people which leads to a feeling of loneliness,
isolation and depression (around three/ fourth of people);
QQ slightly more than a half of the people claimed that timidity causes false
appraisal in the eyes of others. Nevertheless, it does not exclude the possibility of obtaining a positive social appraisal. A great majority of the respondents
agreed that timidity helped them to avoid negative opinions from others (26
out of 29 people);
QQ slightly more than a half of the people claimed that timidity evokes an
amiable impression of modesty, secretiveness, being an anonymous person,
enables to act in a more intelligent way and be careful towards people as well
as increases privacy.
Timidity Against Coping Difficult Situations
95
Self-appraisal as timid differentiated people with regards to the stress
coping styles they used, especially emotional style and avoidant style but only
in the subscale of seeking social contact. In the second form of the avoidant
style which is engagement in substitute activities, only statistical tendency
was observed:
QQ timid, compared to non-timid, people preferred emotional style;
QQ timid, compared to non-timid, people less frequently chose the avoidant style in the form of seeking social contact.
The relationship between self-appraisal as timid and stress coping styles
was partially modified by marital status and gender:
QQ timid single people more often applied the emotional style and rarely –
the avoidant style and seeking social contacts than single people who did not
appraise themselves as timid;
QQ timid women more often applied the emotional style and rarely
– the avoidant style and seeking social contacts than women who did not appraise themselves as timid.
Gender differentiated the respondents with regards to the applied stress
coping styles regardless of being timid or not:
QQ women more often applied task-oriented and emotional style than
men. With respect to other research, women who appraised themselves as
timid more often applied the emotional style than those who did not see
themselves as timid;
QQ men engaged in substitute activities more often than women.
QQ References
Bee, H. (1998). Human development psychology. [Polish]. Poznań: Zysk i S-ka
Wydawnictwo.
Bee, H. (2003). Human lifetime development. [Polish]. Poznań: Zysk i S-ka
Wydawnictwo.
Borecka-Biernat, D. (1994). Behaviour of timid children during social exposure. [Polish]. Problemy Opiekuńczo-Wychowawcze, 2, 15–19.
Carducci, B. (2008). Timidity – new courageous approach. [Polish]. Kraków: Znak.
Dzwonkowska, I. (2009). Timidity against supportive and difficult relationships with
people. [Polish]. Kraków: Oficyna Wydawnicza „Impuls”.
Gurba, E. (2000). Emerging adulthood. [Polish]. In: B. Harwas-Napierała, J. Trempała.
Human development psychology. [Polish]. vol. 2. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
96
Roman Ossowski, Justyna Żabińska, Marta Kosiol
Harwas-Napierała, B. (1995). Timidity of adults. Genesis-Diagnosis-Therapy. [Polish].
Poznań: Wydawnictwo Fundacji „Humaniora”.
Heszen-Niejodek, I. (2000). Theory of psychological stress and coping. [Polish]. In:
J. Strelau (ed.). Psychology. [Polish], vol. 3. Gdańsk: GWP.
Heszen, I. Sęk, H. (2007). Psychology of health. [Polish]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo
Naukowe PWN, pp. 143–147.
Heszen-Niejodek, I., Sęk H. (2008). Health and stress. [Polish]. In: J. Strelau, D. Doliński
(ed.). Psychology. Academic Handbook, vol. 1. [Polish], Gdańsk: GWP.
Hornowska, E. (2010). Psychological tests. Theory and practice. [Polish]. Warszawa:
Wydawnictwo Naukowe „Scholar”.
Oleś, P.K. (2002). Development of identity.[Polish]. In: B. Harwas-Napierała, J. Trempała. Human development psychology, vol. 3. [Polish]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo
Naukowe PWN.
Selye, H. (1979). Taming stress. [Polish]. Warszawa: Państwowy Instytut Wydawniczy.
Strelau, J. (1982). Regulatory functions of temperament. [Polish]. Wrocław:
Ossolineum.
Strelau, J. (1996). Temperament against stress. Temperament as a factor which modifies
stressors, state and effects of stress and coping methods. [Polish]. In: I. Heszen-Niejodek, Z. Ratajczak (ed.). Human under stress. Theoretical and methodological
problems. [Polish]. Katowice: Wydawnictwo UŚ.
Strelau, J. (2000). Psychology. Academic Handbook, vol. 2. [Polish]. Gdańsk: GWP,
pp. 408–410.
Strelau, J., Jaworowska, A., Wrześniewski, K., Szczepaniak, P. (2005). Coping Inventory
for Stressful Situations CISS – handbook. [Polish]. Warszawa: Pracownia Testów
Psychologicznych Polskiego Towarzystwa Psychologicznego.
Strelau, J. (2006). Temperament as a regulator of behaviour. From the perspective of
modern research. [Polish]. Gdańsk: GWP.
Terelak, J. (2001). Psychology of stress. [Polish]. Bydgoszcz: Oficyna Wydawnicza
BRANTA, pp. 69–73.
Trempała, J. (2002). Cognitive development. [Polish]. In: B. Harwas-Napierała, J. Trempała. Human development psychology, vol. 3. [Polish]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo
Naukowe PWN.
Turner, J.S., Helms, D.B. (1999). Human development. [Polish]. Warszawa: WSiP.
Tyszkowa, M. (1978). Personality causes of the timidity syndrome. [Polish]. Psychologia Wychowawcza, 3, pp. 230–241.
Wojciechowska, J. (2004). Emerging adulthood: threats to development. [Polish]. Remedium, 133 (3), pp. 4–5.
Zimbardo, P. (2002). Shyness. What is it?. What to do about it? [Polish]. Warszawa:
Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.